Habeas Corpus

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

• Willard v. Linley Pearson
  823 F.2d 1141· 7th Cir.· 1987-07-09 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice from pretrial publicity, media coverage during trial, a jury tour of the jail, or the denial of a motion to sever crimes, and that his Fourth Amendment claim w
• Bates v. Blackburn
  805 F.2d 569· 5th Cir.· 1986-12-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that federal habeas relief is barred by the procedural default rule (Wainwright v. Sykes) when a petitioner fails to make a contemporaneous objection in state court, unless cause and prejudice are shown.
• Bowen v. U.S. Parole Comm'n & Robert J. Christensen
  805 F.2d 885· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-05 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Parole Commission provided adequate notice of potential consequences for parole revocation, including forfeiture of street time, and that the Commission's consideration of dismissed charges was permissible.
• Reddix v. Thigpen
  805 F.2d 506· 5th Cir.· 1986-11-19 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the denial of lesser-included-offense instructions did not violate federal constitutional rights, the jury instructions on intent to rob were adequate, and the confession was voluntary.
• Davis v. Herring
  800 F.2d 513· 5th Cir.· 1986-09-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a jury's manslaughter verdict implicitly acquits the defendant of murder, and the Double Jeopardy Clause bars a subsequent prosecution for a lesser-included offense, such as shooting into an occupied building, which was a necessary element of the murder charge
• van Pilon v. Amos Reed
  799 F.2d 1332· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-16 ·cited 20×
  A district court's issuance of a limited certificate of probable cause does not restrict the appellate court's review to only those issues stated in the certificate. The appellate court must address all issues raised by the petitioner.
• Glass v. Blackburn
  791 F.2d 1165· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right, thus denying the certificate of probable cause and dismissing the appeal.
• Smith v. O.L. McCOTTER
  786 F.2d 697· 5th Cir.· 1986-04-07 ·cited 20×
  A federal court reviewing a state conviction via habeas corpus is limited to federal constitutional claims, and a guilty plea waives most preceding claims, including alleged defects in the indictment or lack of personal service.
• Damiano v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n & Jim Smith
  785 F.2d 929· 11th Cir.· 1986-04-01 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while errors in calculating a presumptive parole release date (PPRD) do not raise constitutional issues, the use of procedurally flawed disciplinary reports to extend a PPRD does present a colorable due process claim, and disparate treatment in PPRD modificati
• Sampley v. Attorney General OF North Carolina
  786 F.2d 610· 4th Cir.· 1986-03-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a state trial court's denial of a continuance, which resulted in the defendant proceeding to trial without counsel, did not violate the Sixth Amendment because the defendant failed to demonstrate a lack of fair opportunity to secure counsel and the denial was
• Umanzor v. Lambert
  782 F.2d 1299· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-18 ·cited 20×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the alien's departure was not legally executed because of insufficient notice to his attorney, and therefore the district court erred in dismissing the habeas petition.
• Messer v. Kemp
  474 U.S. 1088· U.S.· 1986-01-21 ·cited 20×
• Sterling Rault, Sr. v. State OF La.
  772 F.2d 117· 5th Cir.· 1985-09-13 ·cited 20×
  The court denied the application for a certificate of probable cause, finding the petitioner failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right.
• Charles "Red" Warden v. Wyrick
  770 F.2d 112· 8th Cir.· 1985-08-09 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition, affirming the denial of relief.
• Dendalee McBEE v. Grant
  763 F.2d 811· 6th Cir.· 1985-06-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the petitioner's Sandstrom claim is procedurally barred due to failure to object at trial, and the trial judge's comment did not render the trial fundamentally unfair.
• Burnside v. White
  760 F.2d 217· 8th Cir.· 1985-04-24 ·cited 20×
  The Court held that the application of a new parole statute, which changed parole from a mandatory to a discretionary release, did not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause because the Board determined that releasing the inmate would be a detriment to the community, a reason that woul
• Tyler v. Kemp
  755 F.2d 741· 11th Cir.· 1985-02-22 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel during the penalty phase of her trial due to counsel's failure to present mitigating evidence, and this failure prejudiced the defense.
• Swanger v. Zimmerman
  750 F.2d 291· 3d Cir.· 1984-12-21 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a habeas corpus petitioner has exhausted state remedies if the claims were presented to the state courts, even if the appellate court did not discuss them due to a finding of waiver.
• Rudolph v. Blackburn
  750 F.2d 302· 5th Cir.· 1984-12-04 ·cited 20×
  A federal habeas petitioner's failure to raise an unexhausted claim in a prior petition constitutes an abuse of the writ, even if the claim was unexhausted at the time of the prior petition.
• Dobbert v. Wainwright
  468 U.S. 1231· U.S.· 1984-09-07 ·cited 20×
  The dissenting justices would grant a stay of execution pending the disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari. They argue that the federal courts erred in deferring to a state court's finding that there was no evidence of perjury, despite a recantation by the key witness
• Monroe v. State Court OF Fulton Cnty.
  739 F.2d 568· 11th Cir.· 1984-08-20 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Georgia statute prohibiting flag mutilation was unconstitutional as applied to the appellant's act of burning the flag during a political demonstration, as the act constituted protected symbolic speech.
• Taylor v. United States Parole Comm'n
  734 F.2d 1152· 6th Cir.· 1984-05-22 ·cited 20×
  The hearsay evidence relied upon by the Parole Commission was reasonably reliable, and therefore the district court should be affirmed.
• Carter v. United States
  733 F.2d 735· 10th Cir.· 1984-05-07 ·cited 20×
  A district court order prohibiting a litigant from filing future complaints or petitions without payment of all filing fees violates 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) by unduly impairing the litigant's constitutional right of access to the courts.
• Taylor v. Maggio
  727 F.2d 341· 5th Cir.· 1984-02-27 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right, thus denying applications for certificates of probable cause and dismissing appeals.
• WOE v. Cuomo
  729 F.2d 96· 2d Cir.· 1984-02-22 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while JCAH accreditation creates a presumption of adequate care, it is not conclusive, and a facility's loss of HHS certification can rebut this presumption, requiring further factual inquiry. Claims based solely on disparities with general hospitals or lack o
• Feela v. Israel
  727 F.2d 151· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-03 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the introduction of van theft evidence, for which the defendants had been acquitted, was not harmless error as to the conspiracy conviction, requiring it to be set aside. However, the court found that the introduction of this evidence, as well as comments on p
• McLAUGHLIN v. Gabriel
  726 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1984-01-27 ·cited 20×
  A federal habeas corpus petitioner's failure to object to jury instructions at trial, and subsequent failure to present claims in prior petitions without adequate excuse, bars consideration of those claims.
• Torres-MacIas v. United States Parole Comm'n
  730 F.2d 1214· 9th Cir.· 1984-01-24 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the United States Parole Commission did not abuse its discretion in reconsidering and delaying a prisoner's parole date based on new information, even if that information existed prior to the initial parole decision but had not been considered.
• Carrier v. Hutto
  724 F.2d 396· 4th Cir.· 1983-12-27 ·cited 20×
  The dissenting judge argues that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies and did not demonstrate cause and prejudice for federal habeas review.
• Moyer Reed Plaster v. United States
  720 F.2d 340· 4th Cir.· 1983-10-20 ·cited 20×
  The court held that habeas corpus is the proper procedural path for judicial review of an extradition certification, and that the judiciary has jurisdiction to ensure extradition does not violate constitutional rights, including those arising from an immunity agreement.
• Nelson v. Solem
  714 F.2d 57· 8th Cir.· 1983-08-15 ·cited 20×
• Alessi v. Quinlan
  711 F.2d 497· 2d Cir.· 1983-07-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Parole Commission did not impermissibly engage in "double counting" by considering aggravating factors already used to classify offense severity when setting a parole release date beyond the guidelines, and that considering prior conduct does not violate t
• Hearn v. Mintzes
  708 F.2d 1072· 6th Cir.· 1983-06-09 ·cited 20×
  The court held that prosecutorial comments on the defendant's failure to testify, when not harmless error, warrant a writ of habeas corpus, and that the state appellate court's summary affirmance based on unsubstantiality was a decision on the merits, not a procedural bar.
• Williams v. United States Parole Comm'n
  707 F.2d 1060· 9th Cir.· 1983-06-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a sentencing judge's parole comment form or presentence report can be considered 'new and significant adverse information' if not available to hearing examiners at the time of their decision.
• YIU Sing Chun and Jee-Chiu Shan v. Sava
  708 F.2d 869· 2d Cir.· 1983-05-19 ·cited 20×
  Stowaways seeking asylum are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge to determine their eligibility for asylum, despite statutory provisions that generally deny procedural rights to stowaways.
• Cameron v. Fogarty
  705 F.2d 676· 2d Cir.· 1983-04-20 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a district court erred in sua sponte dismissing a pro se prisoner's civil rights complaint as frivolous before service of process and without proper consideration of the filing fee or in forma pauperis status.
• Brown v. Marshall
  704 F.2d 333· 6th Cir.· 1983-04-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that new issues not presented to the district court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal in a habeas corpus proceeding.
• Thomas v. ARN
  704 F.2d 865· 6th Cir.· 1983-04-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that Ohio's statutory definition of reasonable doubt, when considered as a whole with other jury instructions, adequately conveyed the concept and did not violate due process. The court also held that the trial court was not constitutionally required to instruct th
• Luchai Ruviwat v. Smith
  701 F.2d 844· 9th Cir.· 1983-03-18 ·cited 20×
  A federal prisoner must exhaust administrative remedies before filing a habeas corpus petition challenging parole decisions.
• Bass v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  696 F.2d 1154· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-04 ·cited 20×
  The court concurred in the result remanding the case for an evidentiary hearing on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Smith v. Louie L. Wainwright
  425 So. 2d 618· Fla. 2d DCA· 1982-12-30 ·cited 20×
  Petition for delayed appeal in a first-degree murder case denied on grounds of laches, where petitioner waited thirteen years after the legal right to seek delayed review was established.
• Fardella v. Garrison
  698 F.2d 208· 4th Cir.· 1982-12-23 ·cited 20×
  The Commission was authorized to reopen parole proceedings based on previously existing but unconsidered information, and its actions did not create a presumption of vindictiveness.
• State v. Soto
  423 So. 2d 362· Fla.· 1982-12-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that supporting documents accompanying an extradition demand can satisfy statutory requirements, even if the indictment itself does not explicitly state the accused committed an act in Florida intentionally resulting in a crime in the demanding state.
• Walker v. Prisoner Review Bd.
  694 F.2d 499· 7th Cir.· 1982-12-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a parole candidate's claim of denial of access to documents considered by the parole board is cognizable under § 1983 and that the board's own rule mandates such access, implementing due process requirements.
• Stubbs v. Bordenkircher
  689 F.2d 1205· 4th Cir.· 1982-09-30 ·cited 20×
  A habeas petitioner must demonstrate that a trial court's restriction on consulting with counsel actually deprived them of counsel they would have otherwise received, not just that the restriction existed.
• United States ex rel. John William Bilyew v. Franzen
  686 F.2d 1238· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the misallocation of the burden of proof on the defendant to prove his unfitness to stand trial was not harmless error, as there was a reasonable possibility that the trial judge would have found the defendant unfit had the burden been correctly placed on the
• Smith v. Balkcom
  677 F.2d 20· 5th Cir.· 1982-05-10 ·cited 20×
  The court granted a temporary recall of its mandate and a stay of execution to allow the Supreme Court to consider the case, while also expressing disapproval of the tactics used to create an emergency.
• United States ex rel. Steven Grundset v. Franzen
  675 F.2d 870· 7th Cir.· 1982-04-13 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment for the petitioner, as the state record, despite the lack of a verbatim transcript, sufficiently demonstrated the voluntary and knowing waiver of constitutional rights.
• Lonnie S. Sales v. Harris
  675 F.2d 532· 2d Cir.· 1982-04-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while a jury instruction impermissibly removed the issue of photo array suggestiveness from the jury, this error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and the prosecutor's summation did not deny a fair trial.
• Barksdale v. Blackburn
  670 F.2d 22· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the dismissal of the appeal as untimely was improper because the appeal period runs from the date of entry of the judgment, not the filing date, and affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief on the merits.