Habeas Corpus

18,782 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Hamish Scott MacKAY v. McALEXANDER
  268 F.2d 35· 9th Cir.· 1959-06-09 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the deportation order and the denial of the application for suspension of deportation were valid, affirming the lower court's judgment.
• McMAHAN v. Hunter
  179 F.2d 661· 10th Cir.· 1950-01-04 ·cited 23×
  A military prisoner must exhaust remedies under Article of War 53 before seeking habeas corpus relief in federal court.
• Rosenthal v. Hunter
  164 F.2d 949· 10th Cir.· 1947-11-17 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the federal court had jurisdiction to try and sentence the petitioner because California voluntarily surrendered him to federal custody.
• Hawk v. Olson
  130 F.2d 910· 8th Cir.· 1942-10-19 ·cited 23×
  A federal court should not issue a writ of habeas corpus to a state prisoner unless exceptional circumstances of peculiar urgency are shown, and the prisoner has exhausted state remedies.
• United States ex rel. McCANN v. Adams
  126 F.2d 774· 2d Cir.· 1942-03-27 ·cited 23×
  The relator has not met the burden to show he did not competently waive his right to counsel and a jury trial.
• United States ex rel. Zapp v. Dist. Dir. of Immigr. & Naturalization
  120 F.2d 762· 2d Cir.· 1941-06-06 ·cited 23×
  The court held that aliens are not entitled to release on habeas corpus based on pending criminal charges, nor do they have an absolute right to bail pending deportation proceedings.
• United States ex rel. Emanuel v. Jaeger
  117 F.2d 483· 2d Cir.· 1941-02-10 ·cited 23×
  A commitment order for contempt, even if based on an erroneous jurisdictional finding, is not subject to collateral attack via habeas corpus if the bankruptcy court previously determined its jurisdiction.
• Rowland v. State
  129 Fla. 662· Fla.· 1937-10-23 ·cited 23×
  Chief of Police Rowland challenged his conviction under Miami's Building Code ordinance that authorized the building inspector to unilaterally condemn and destroy private property. The Florida Supreme Court held the ordinance unconstitutional because it violated due process by al
• Isiah (Izell) Chambers v. State
  111 Fla. 707· Fla.· 1933-12-19 ·cited 23×
  Four defendants convicted of first-degree murder in the robbery and beating death of Robert M. Darsey appealed their death sentences. The Florida Supreme Court initially affirmed their convictions on the merits, but subsequently granted leave for them to petition for writ of erro
• Ford v. State
  402 So. 3d 973· Fla.· 2025-02-07 ·cited 22×
  James D. Ford, sentenced to death for brutal 1997 murders of a couple and sexual assault of the wife, appeals the summary denial of his third successive postconviction motion filed shortly before his scheduled execution. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the denial, rejecting For
• Elliott v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sheriff Ric Bradshaw
  59 So. 3d 1182· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-04-11 ·cited 22×
  Former husband in a dissolution of marriage action seeks to quash a civil contempt commitment order for failure to pay alimony. The court quashes the commitment order because the trial court's finding that the husband has present ability to pay based on equity in his home was spe
• Dailey v. State
  965 So. 2d 38· Fla.· 2007-05-31 ·cited 22×
  James Dailey appeals the trial court's denial of his postconviction motion for relief and petitions for habeas corpus after being convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the 1985 killing of fourteen-year-old Shelley Boggio. The Florida Supreme Court affirms th
• Dillbeck v. State
  964 So. 2d 95· Fla.· 2007-05-10 ·cited 22×
  Dillbeck appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to vacate his first-degree murder conviction and death sentence, raising four ineffective assistance of counsel claims under Strickland v. Washington. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial, finding that trial counse
• Dyson v. Campbell
  921 So. 2d 692· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-02-03 ·cited 22×
  Chester Dyson seeks habeas corpus relief contending that the $25,000 and $10,000 bonds set for his burglary and robbery charges are effectively no bond due to his inability to pay them. The court denies relief, holding that a defendant's inability to meet a bond amount does not a
• Pliler v. Ford
  542 U.S. 225· U.S.· 2004-06-21 ·cited 22×
• Bunkley v. State
  882 So. 2d 890· Fla.· 2004-05-27 ·cited 22×
  On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Florida Supreme Court reaffirmed Bunkley's 1987 armed burglary conviction, holding that under Florida law in 1989, whether his three-inch folding knife was a 'common pocketknife' exception or a 'dangerous weapon' was properly a jury ques
• Anderson v. Singletary
  111 F.3d 801· 11th Cir.· 1997-04-18 ·cited 22×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the filing fee requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 do not apply to habeas corpus proceedings under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2254 and 2255. Although habeas corpus proceedings are technically civil in nature, they are hybrid actions sui gener
• Roberts v. Fla. Dep't OF Child. & Families
  687 So. 2d 51· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-01-29 ·cited 22×
  Roberts, the natural father of a six-year-old adjudicated dependent child, sought habeas corpus to obtain custody from the Florida Department of Children and Families. The court granted the petition, holding that Florida Statute § 39.41(1) mandates placement with a non-custodial
• R.W. v. A.C. Soud, Jr.
  639 So. 2d 25· Fla.· 1994-06-30 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting justice would have approved the juvenile judge's actions in detaining a juvenile who refused to cooperate with a predisposition report.
• Steinhorst v. Singletary
  638 So. 2d 33· Fla.· 1994-05-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the petitioner's claim of disproportionate sentencing was procedurally barred and factually distinguishable from precedent, thus denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Andrews v. Deland
  943 F.2d 1162· 10th Cir.· 1991-08-23 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge argues that the petitioner has demonstrated cause for procedural default and that the state's procedural bar is inadequate, thus the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel should be heard on its merits.
• United States v. Blair William Guthrie
  931 F.2d 564· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred by not respecting a state court's vacation of a prior conviction for sentencing purposes under the Guidelines, but affirmed the conviction and other rulings.
• McCONICO v. State OF Ala.
  919 F.2d 1543· 11th Cir.· 1990-12-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant's trial counsel faced an actual conflict of interest due to simultaneous representation of the defendant and his wife in an insurance claim, and this conflict adversely affected counsel's representation, violating the Sixth Amendment.
• Chambers v. Armontrout
  907 F.2d 825· 8th Cir.· 1990-07-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the lawyer's decision not to call a witness, based on a strategic assessment of the testimony's potential harm outweighing its benefits, did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Towne v. Dugger
  899 F.2d 1104· 11th Cir.· 1990-04-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a suspect's question to an officer about whether he should get a lawyer constitutes an equivocal request for counsel, requiring further questioning to cease until the request is clarified.
• Clark v. Dugger
  559 So. 2d 192· Fla.· 1990-02-01 ·cited 22×
  Raymond Clark, a death row inmate, petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus raising multiple claims challenging his conviction and death sentence. The Court denied the petition, finding most claims procedurally barred and the remaining claims lacking merit
• Collins v. Zant
  892 F.2d 1502· 11th Cir.· 1990-01-08 ·cited 22×
  The court held that both the Sandstrom and Jackson claims must be dismissed under Rule 9(b) as successive petitions, and the district court's denial of relief is affirmed.
• Scott v. Dugger
  891 F.2d 800· 11th Cir.· 1989-12-14 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no constitutional violations in the appellant's capital case.
• Hopkinson v. Shillinger
  888 F.2d 1286· 10th Cir.· 1989-10-24 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the prosecutor's remarks constituted Caldwell error, violating the Eighth Amendment, and thus the death sentence must be vacated.
• Coleman v. McCORMICK
  874 F.2d 1280· 9th Cir.· 1989-05-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant's sentence must be reversed due to procedural issues in place at the time of trial regarding capital punishment hearings.
• Dorsey v. Parke
  872 F.2d 163· 6th Cir.· 1989-04-10 ·cited 22×
  The Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses does not guarantee a defendant the right to cross-examine into a relevant subject already broached solely to expose witness demeanor, nor does it mandate the admission of evidence routinely excluded by evidentiary rules, even if exc
• Mercer v. Armontrout
  864 F.2d 1429· 8th Cir.· 1988-12-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the petitioner's second habeas petition did not present substantial claims that would undermine the accuracy of his guilt or sentencing determination, thus denying a certificate of probable cause.
• Wilton Chatman-Bey v. Thornburgh
  864 F.2d 804· D.C. Cir.· 1988-12-23 ·cited 22×
  A prisoner's challenge to an administratively calculated parole eligibility date, which does not guarantee immediate or earlier release, is not exclusively cognizable in habeas corpus.
• Bell v. Lynaugh
  858 F.2d 978· 5th Cir.· 1988-10-13 ·cited 22×
  The court agreed with the lower courts that counsel abused the writ of habeas corpus.
• Amos v. The State OF Minn. & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Minn.
  849 F.2d 1070· 8th Cir.· 1988-06-14 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional error in the state court proceedings.
• Rubino v. Lynaugh
  845 F.2d 1266· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-18 ·cited 22×
  A retroactive judicial abrogation of a legal defense, even if inconsistently applied, can constitute an ex post facto violation if it substantially disadvantages a defendant by removing the possibility of a more favorable outcome or sentence.
• Mercer v. Armontrout
  844 F.2d 582· 8th Cir.· 1988-04-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the jury's finding of agency as an aggravating factor was permissible and that even if one aggravating factor was invalid, the death sentence could still stand. The court also found no constitutional error in the jury selection or the admission of evidence of
• United States v. Smith
  844 F.2d 203· 5th Cir.· 1988-04-19 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(c)(3)(D) is not cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 if it could have been raised on direct appeal. The court also affirmed the denial of claims regarding involuntary guilty plea and ineffective assistance of c
• Zeigler v. Dugger
  524 So. 2d 419· Fla.· 1988-04-07 ·cited 22×
  The court should deny Ziegler's latest claim, as it is procedurally barred and not affected by Hitchcock v. Dugger.
• Fencl v. Abrahamson
  841 F.2d 760· 7th Cir.· 1988-03-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that references to the petitioner's post-Miranda silence violated due process, but these errors were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also found no merit in the ineffective assistance of counsel or jury instruction claims.
• Bridges v. Dugger
  518 So. 2d 298· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-11-06 ·cited 22×
  Bridges petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus claiming his trial counsel failed to file a notice of appeal despite his request, and that his sentence violated his plea agreement by triggering the habitual offender statute. The court denied the petition, holding that Bridges lack
• Leggins v. A.L. Lockhart
  822 F.2d 764· 8th Cir.· 1987-06-25 ·cited 22×
  A petitioner's failure to raise a double jeopardy claim in state court bars federal habeas review unless cause and prejudice are shown, and the claim was not so novel as to be unavailable.
• Joseph D. McMAHON P-7814 v. Fulcomer
  821 F.2d 934· 3d Cir.· 1987-06-08 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas petition as mixed, and that the petitioner did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel.
• High v. Kemp
  819 F.2d 988· 11th Cir.· 1987-06-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the jury instructions regarding mitigating circumstances were adequate and that the prosecutor's comments about other murders did not render the trial fundamentally unfair. The court also found that Batson v. Kentucky does not apply retroactively to collateral
• Johnson v. Dugger
  817 F.2d 726· 11th Cir.· 1987-05-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition was proper, as the trial court's alleged errors did not render the petitioner's trial fundamentally unfair.
• United States ex rel. Gary Barnard v. Lane
  819 F.2d 798· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-20 ·cited 22×
  A state prisoner's procedural default in failing to raise an ineffective assistance of counsel claim on direct appeal can be excused if the prisoner demonstrates cause and prejudice, where ineffective assistance of appellate counsel constitutes cause.
• Chandler v. Otie Jones & Attorney Gen. of the State of Tenn.
  813 F.2d 773· 6th Cir.· 1987-03-13 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the denial of the writ of habeas corpus, finding that the petitioner's sentence was not cruel and unusual punishment and that he did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Holloway v. A.L. Lockhart
  813 F.2d 874· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a local rule conditioning discovery on leave of court for prisoner petitions is invalid because it conflicts with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and that summary judgment was inappropriate due to genuine issues of material fact and insufficient discover
• United States ex rel. Donald C. Villa v. J.W. Fairman and Neil F. Hartigan
  810 F.2d 715· 7th Cir.· 1987-01-28 ·cited 22×
  The court should remand to the district court for a determination of waiver and cause and prejudice.
• Evans v. Thigpen
  809 F.2d 239· 5th Cir.· 1987-01-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court's denial of the habeas petition was correct, affirming the death sentence.