Habeas Corpus

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

• Poole v. United States
  832 F.2d 561· 11th Cir.· 1987-11-19 ·cited 21×
  The court held that defense counsel can stipulate to the federally insured status of banks without the defendant's explicit consent, and that the defendant was adequately represented at sentencing despite a procedural timing issue.
• Duro v. Reina
  851 F.2d 1136· 9th Cir.· 1987-07-09 ·cited 21×
  The dissent argues that retained tribal sovereignty applies only to tribal members, and federal statutes do not grant tribes criminal jurisdiction over nonmember Indians, leading to potential discrimination.
• Mills v. State
  507 So. 2d 602· Fla.· 1987-05-05 ·cited 21×
  John Mills, a death row inmate convicted of first-degree murder, challenged his death sentence through a Rule 3.850 motion and habeas corpus petition, claiming prosecutorial misconduct, ineffective assistance of counsel, and other trial errors. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed
• Reed Wayne Hamilton v. Crispus NIX
  809 F.2d 463· 8th Cir.· 1987-01-12 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the testimony of witnesses discovered through lawful means, even if obtained after police misconduct, is admissible under the independent source doctrine. The admission of marijuana was error but harmless, and prosecutorial remarks did not render the trial fun
• Wiley v. Louie L. Wainwright
  793 F.2d 1190· 11th Cir.· 1986-07-18 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the petitioner did not demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his guilty plea, nor was the magistrate subject to disqualification due to alleged bias.
• Knaubert v. Goldsmith
  791 F.2d 722· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-09 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the habeas corpus petition or denying the motion for appointment of counsel, as the petitioner's claims were either procedurally barred, fairly adjudicated in state court, or did not warrant federal intervention.
• Filimon Castillo Perez v. Sullivan
  793 F.2d 249· 10th Cir.· 1986-06-09 ·cited 21×
  A fifteen-month delay between a guilty plea and sentencing, and subsequent delay in habitual criminal proceedings, did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment speedy trial rights or Fifth Amendment due process rights.
• Warjina S. Sarkis Bothyo v. A.D. Moyer
  772 F.2d 353· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-09 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the INS district director did not abuse his discretion in denying a stay of deportation, and the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition did not violate due process.
• Proffitt v. Louie L. Wainwright
  756 F.2d 1500· 11th Cir.· 1985-03-26 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the prior panel's opinion did not implicitly require resentencing by a jury, and the petitioner's claim regarding jury instructions on mitigating circumstances is barred by procedural default.
• Dobbert v. State
  456 So. 2d 424· Fla.· 1984-08-28 ·cited 21×
  Ernest John Dobbert appeals the trial court's denial of motions to vacate his death sentence for the 1974 murder of his nine-year-old daughter. The Florida Supreme Court affirms all denials, rejecting claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, perjured testimony, and prosecutor
• Strickland v. Francis
  738 F.2d 1542· 11th Cir.· 1984-07-31 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the jury's determination of competency was not supported by sufficient evidence, and the petitioner was not competent to stand trial, violating his due process rights.
• In re Extradition of John Edward Burt to the Federal Republic of Germany
  737 F.2d 1477· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-02 ·cited 21×
  Federal courts have the authority in habeas corpus review of extraditions to consider constitutional challenges to the executive branch's conduct in deciding to extradite, not just the magistrate's findings.
• Williams v. Wallis
  734 F.2d 1434· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-22 ·cited 21×
  Alabama's procedures for releasing insanity acquittees do not violate equal protection or due process, and class certification was properly denied.
• Goode v. Louie L. Wainwright
  731 F.2d 1482· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-04 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding procedural due process and substantive due process/Eighth Amendment were properly denied, with the latter being barred due to abuse of the writ.
• Ritter v. Smith
  726 F.2d 1505· 11th Cir.· 1984-02-27 ·cited 21×
  The 1975 Alabama death penalty statute's sentencing procedures, which required the judge to consider the jury's mandatory death sentence, are unconstitutional. However, the statute's preclusion of lesser included offenses at the guilt phase did not entitle the petitioner to a new
• Scott v. Louie L. Wainwright
  433 So. 2d 974· Fla.· 1983-06-03 ·cited 21×
  Paul William Scott, convicted and sentenced to death for first-degree murder, challenged the effectiveness of his appellate counsel and sought habeas corpus relief, error coram nobis, and stay of execution. The Florida Supreme Court denied all relief, finding no reversible error
• Williams v. State
  421 So. 2d 512· Fla.· 1982-10-28 ·cited 21×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the rule announced in State v. Sarmiento, prohibiting warrantless electronic interception of conversations in a defendant's home, does not apply retroactively to convictions that became final before Sarmiento was decided. The Court applied the
• O'Bryan v. Estelle
  691 F.2d 706· 5th Cir.· 1982-10-27 ·cited 21×
  The court (in dissent) would not grant a stay of execution because the petitioner's claims of constitutional error were without merit.
• Wolfe v. Coleman
  681 F.2d 1302· 11th Cir.· 1982-08-02 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the petitioner's appeal was not moot and that he received adequate due process, affirming the denial of his habeas petition.
• Dunn v. Wyrick
  679 F.2d 731· 8th Cir.· 1982-06-01 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court was justified in denying the habeas petition without an evidentiary hearing because the petitioner's allegations were contradicted by his sworn statements during the plea proceedings.
• Winfrey v. Maggio
  664 F.2d 550· 5th Cir.· 1981-12-28 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and an unconstitutionally disproportionate sentence lacked merit, and that a claim of conflict of interest was unexhausted.
• Goodman v. Keohane
  663 F.2d 1044· 11th Cir.· 1981-12-14 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the Parole Board's issuance of a detainer was proper and that the petitioner was not entitled to habeas corpus relief due to delays or transfers.
• Satchell v. Cardwell
  653 F.2d 408· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-10 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel was not violated by his attorney's failure to file a motion to suppress evidence, as the attorney's actions were within the bounds of reasonably competent representation and the entry wa
• Johns v. Dep't OF Just. OF the United States
  653 F.2d 884· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-04 ·cited 21×
• Atkins v. People OF the State OF Mich. (William L. Cahalan
  644 F.2d 543· 6th Cir.· 1981-03-02 ·cited 21×
  The Sixth Circuit held that while a federal court can entertain a pretrial habeas petition for a speedy trial claim to enforce the state's duty to provide a prompt trial, the district court erred in dismissing the indictment prematurely. The court also held that the arbitrary rev
• Joensen v. Louie L. Wainwright
  615 F.2d 1077· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-23 ·cited 21×
  The court held that dismissing an escapee's appeal without prior notice or hearing does not violate due process, and there is no constitutional right to reinstatement of an abandoned appeal.
• United States v. Warren
  610 F.2d 680· 9th Cir.· 1980-01-03 ·cited 21×
  A district court exceeds its jurisdiction under Fed.R.Crim.P. 35 by ordering a transfer of an inmate from state to federal custody or by crediting time spent in state custody, as these are matters of comity and executive discretion.
• Tules v. Zapata
  585 F.2d 750· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-07 ·cited 21×
  Once a habeas petitioner raises a substantial doubt about competency by clear and convincing evidence, they need only prove incompetency by a preponderance of the evidence at the ensuing hearing.
• Sabatier v. Sheriff Edward K. Dabrowski
  586 F.2d 866· 1st Cir.· 1978-11-15 ·cited 21×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition regarding extradition for armed robbery, finding the offense extraditable under the applicable treaty.
• Medrano v. State OF Tex.
  580 F.2d 803· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-21 ·cited 21×
  The court held that a petition for removal under 28 U.S.C. § 1443(1) based on a speedy trial violation is without merit, and the state trial was not void due to lack of notice.
• Meeks v. Havener
  545 F.2d 9· 6th Cir.· 1976-11-18 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the prosecutor's questioning of the defendant about his post-arrest silence, while a violation of due process under Doyle v. Ohio, constituted harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• Thompson v. Procunier
  539 F.2d 26· 9th Cir.· 1976-07-21 ·cited 21×
  Where a state court denies a habeas corpus petition presenting a federal constitutional question without stating a reason, the federal court will assume the state court passed on the merits and resolved the issue against the petitioner.
• United States v. Ecker
  543 F.2d 178· D.C. Cir.· 1976-04-02 ·cited 21×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision to deny the patient's petition for conditional release.
• Palmore v. Superior Court of the Dist. of Columbia
  515 F.2d 1294· D.C. Cir.· 1975-07-09 ·cited 21×
  The dissenting judge holds that 23 D.C. Code § 110(g) is an exhaustion of remedies requirement that does not affect federal habeas corpus jurisdiction.
• Fay Monroe van Meter v. Morgan
  518 F.2d 366· 8th Cir.· 1975-05-20 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the prisoner's complaint as frivolous and duplicative of prior filings.
• United States ex rel. William Matthews v. Johnson
  503 F.2d 339· 3d Cir.· 1974-08-15 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the prior Pennsylvania practice of allowing trial judges discretion to give or withhold voluntary manslaughter instructions without clear standards violated due process.
• Ralls v. Manson
  503 F.2d 491· 2d Cir.· 1974-07-05 ·cited 21×
  The court held that a state prisoner's pending direct appeal to the state Supreme Court, even with delays, means he has not exhausted state remedies as required for federal habeas corpus relief.
• Gaito v. Brierley
  485 F.2d 86· 3d Cir.· 1973-09-21 ·cited 21×
  Compelling a defendant to appear before a jury in prison clothes unconstitutionally infringes his due process right to be presumed innocent, and the district court's finding that the clothes were not identifiable as prison clothes was clearly erroneous.
• Subilosky v. Moore
  443 F.2d 334· 1st Cir.· 1971-06-02 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the improper admission of prior uncounseled convictions for impeachment purposes was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt given the strength of the other evidence.
• Lucien M. Aubut v. State OF Me.
  431 F.2d 688· 1st Cir.· 1970-09-23 ·cited 21×
  The court held that a habeas corpus petition must allege specific facts demonstrating a constitutional violation, not mere generalizations, and denied the request for appointed counsel to search for such errors.
• Private First Class Daniel E. Pitcher v. Laird
  415 F.2d 743· 5th Cir.· 1969-09-03 ·cited 21×
  The court denied the petitioner's motion for a stay pending appeal because he failed to meet the necessary conditions, particularly regarding likelihood of success and irreparable injury.
• State OF Ariz. ex rel. Edgar Merrill v. Turtle
  413 F.2d 683· 9th Cir.· 1969-06-26 ·cited 21×
  Arizona authorities exceeded their jurisdiction by arresting a Navajo Indian on the Navajo Reservation for extradition purposes, as such action infringes upon the Navajo Tribe's right to self-government.
• Hackin v. Arizona
  389 U.S. 143· U.S.· 1967-11-13 ·cited 21×
  The dissenting opinion argues that a state statute prohibiting the unauthorized practice of law may be unconstitutional on its face if it is overbroad and vague, particularly when it interferes with the rights of indigent individuals to seek legal redress. The dissent suggests th
• Johnson v. Beto
  383 F.2d 197· 5th Cir.· 1967-10-06 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the appellant's claims for habeas corpus relief were without merit and affirmed the denial of his petition.
• State OF Minn. ex rel. Glen R. Holscher v. Tahash
  364 F.2d 922· 8th Cir.· 1966-08-19 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the defendant is entitled to a determination of the voluntariness of his statements by the state court, rather than the federal court, and that Jackson v. Denno is to be applied retrospectively.
• Estis L. Gibbs v. Olin G. Blackwell
  354 F.2d 469· 5th Cir.· 1965-12-06 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas corpus petition without a full hearing, as serious constitutional questions regarding the adequacy of counsel and the application of parole revocation statutes were raised.
• Nicholas v. Louie L. Wainwright
  152 So. 2d 458· Fla.· 1963-04-24 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the final responsibility for forfeiting a prisoner's gain time rests with the Board of Commissioners of State Institutions, not delegated officials, as required by statute.
• Cooper v. Sinclair
  66 So. 2d 702· Fla.· 1953-06-26 ·cited 21×
  Cooper challenges his municipal court conviction for violating a Lakeland city ordinance prohibiting the parking and storing of house trailers used for living purposes outside designated trailer parks. The Florida Supreme Court upholds the ordinance as a valid exercise of police
• Simpson v. Goldworm
  59 So. 2d 511· Fla.· 1952-06-13 ·cited 21×
  The Supreme Court of Florida held that a municipality cannot restrict the method of liquor sales (e.g., to "service bars" only) if state law permits broader sales methods, unless specifically authorized by the legislature. The court affirmed the release of a liquor vendor whose l
• Huffman v. Smith
  172 F.2d 129· 9th Cir.· 1949-01-19 ·cited 21×
  The court held that a petitioner must exhaust state remedies before seeking federal habeas corpus relief, and that the lower court erred in considering the merits without such exhaustion.