Habeas Corpus

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

• Stumes v. Solem
  671 F.2d 1150· 8th Cir.· 1982-03-01 ·cited 20×
  The dissenting judge holds that the defendant's statements were voluntary and admissible, distinguishing the case from Edwards v. Arizona.
• Goode v. Louie L. Wainwright
  670 F.2d 941· 11th Cir.· 1982-02-28 ·cited 20×
  The Eleventh Circuit granted a stay of execution, finding the appeal was not frivolous and raised substantial issues, including a due process claim regarding psychological screening data.
• United States v. Scherer
  673 F.2d 176· 7th Cir.· 1982-01-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that newly discovered evidence did not demonstrate fundamental error sufficient to vacate the conviction, and prior rulings on the interpretation of the Gun Control Act and Fourth Amendment issues were controlling.
• Roberts v. Louie L. Wainwright
  666 F.2d 517· 11th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a pro se petition should be interpreted liberally and that the petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was not too conclusory to warrant further inquiry.
• Deloney v. Estelle
  661 F.2d 1061· 5th Cir.· 1981-11-20 ·cited 20×
  A prisoner waives the right to appeal the denial of habeas corpus relief by failing to object to the magistrate's findings and recommendations.
• Hardy v. Greadington
  405 So. 2d 768· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-11-04 ·cited 20×
  Betty Jean Hardy challenged her parole aggravation by the Parole and Probation Commission on habeas corpus grounds, claiming the Commission improperly used elements of her accessory-after-the-fact conviction as an aggravating factor. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's
• Marshall v. Garrison
  659 F.2d 440· 4th Cir.· 1981-09-16 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Parole Commission improperly considered offense severity for a youth offender sentenced before 1976, violating the ex post facto clause, and that the prisoner's claim regarding insufficient evidence for a second alleged robbery warranted an evidentiary hea
• United States ex rel. Thomas Riley v. Franzen
  653 F.2d 1153· 7th Cir.· 1981-07-10 ·cited 20×
  A juvenile's request to speak with his father during custodial interrogation does not automatically invoke his Fifth Amendment rights to silence or counsel, and his confession can be voluntary under the totality of the circumstances.
• Jensen v. Satran
  651 F.2d 605· 8th Cir.· 1981-06-23 ·cited 20×
  The district court erred in summarily dismissing the habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing or adequate development of the record, particularly given the alleged due process violations and lack of a written decision by the prison disciplinary board.
• Crick v. Smith
  650 F.2d 860· 6th Cir.· 1981-06-12 ·cited 20×
  The Court held that the harmless error rule can apply to due process violations concerning juvenile transfer orders, and that the 'deliberate bypass' rule, not 'cause and prejudice,' governs procedural defaults involving failure to appeal.
• Morrow v. Wyrick
  646 F.2d 1229· 8th Cir.· 1981-04-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the introduction of preliminary hearing testimony from an unavailable witness, who was subject to cross-examination, is constitutionally permissible under the Confrontation Clause, and that other alleged errors were matters of state law not rising to constitut
• Chancery Clerk OF Chickasaw Cnty. v. Wallace
  646 F.2d 151· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that individuals involuntarily confined in state mental institutions may bring a § 1983 action challenging the constitutionality of the commitment procedures, and that abstention was not appropriate. However, the court vacated the certification of the defendant cla
• Graham v. Vann
  394 So. 2d 178· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-02-13 ·cited 20×
  Prison inmates challenged the venue of their constitutional rights claims filed in Bradford County (site of Florida State Prison) rather than Leon County (where the state officials' principal headquarters were located). The court affirmed the trial court's denial of the state's m
• Fauls v. Sheriff OF Leon Cnty.
  394 So. 2d 117· Fla.· 1981-01-29 ·cited 20×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that while a governor's rendition warrant should be introduced into evidence in extradition habeas corpus proceedings, the failure to introduce it is not fundamental error when the petitioner does not object and admits the warrant's existence. The d
• Klobuchir v. Commonwealth OF Pa. & the Dist. Attorney of Allegheny Cnty.
  639 F.2d 966· 3d Cir.· 1981-01-23 ·cited 20×
  The court held that due process and equal protection claims, not raised in state courts, are waived and cannot be raised in a federal habeas corpus petition.
• Hart v. Estelle
  634 F.2d 987· 5th Cir.· 1981-01-22 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted his state remedies because the state court did not have a fair opportunity to consider the evidence of his incompetency.
• McKELDIN v. Rose
  631 F.2d 458· 6th Cir.· 1980-10-08 ·cited 20×
  The absence of counsel at a preliminary hearing is subject to harmless error analysis, and automatic reversal is not required.
• Rutledge v. Louie L. Wainwright
  625 F.2d 1200· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the appellant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and inadequate review were insufficient to warrant habeas corpus relief.
• Dodson v. Polk Cnty.
  628 F.2d 1104· 8th Cir.· 1980-08-26 ·cited 20×
  The dissenting judge argues that a public defender, representing an indigent defendant, does not operate under color of state law for the purposes of a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The judge also believes public defenders should have absolute immunity.
• Turner v. Fair
  617 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1980-03-18 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a federal habeas corpus petition must be dismissed if the specific legal theory supporting the constitutional claim was not fairly presented to the state courts.
• Jenkins v. Bordenkircher
  611 F.2d 162· 6th Cir.· 1979-12-19 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the denial of a motion for severance was not so prejudicial as to deny the petitioner a fair trial, and affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief.
• Hammond v. Sandstrom
  376 So. 2d 466· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-11-06 ·cited 20×
  Hammond petitioned for habeas corpus challenging his 60-day jail commitment for civil contempt of failing to pay child support. The Florida District Court of Appeal granted the petition and ordered his discharge, finding the commitment order defective because it lacked required f
• Honeycutt v. Ward
  612 F.2d 36· 2d Cir.· 1979-11-05 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court's finding that the petitioner was not represented by counsel in a 1949 Oklahoma conviction was clearly erroneous, as it was contradicted by documentary evidence and the petitioner's delay prejudiced the state.
• Lono v. Fenton
  581 F.2d 645· 7th Cir.· 1978-07-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the statute authorizing federal officials to contract with states for prisoner custody does not restrict the use of federal prison facilities to only those state offenders in need of treatment.
• Montes v. Jenkins
  581 F.2d 609· 7th Cir.· 1978-07-13 ·cited 20×
  The district court erred by dismissing habeas corpus petitions without considering factual allegations contradicting state court findings and by failing to determine if state remedies were ineffective.
• Prellwitz v. Loyal J. Berg and James Mathews
  578 F.2d 190· 7th Cir.· 1978-06-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the admission of hearsay evidence and the notice provided for the probation revocation hearing did not violate the petitioner's due process rights.
• Knoxson v. Estelle
  574 F.2d 1339· 5th Cir.· 1978-06-15 ·cited 20×
  The court holds that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies regarding new factual allegations presented in a post-submission brief.
• Toler v. Wyrick
  563 F.2d 372· 8th Cir.· 1977-10-12 ·cited 20×
  A federal court must grant an evidentiary hearing in a habeas corpus action if relevant facts are disputed and a fair evidentiary hearing was not granted in state court; however, if no relevant facts are disputed, the court may dismiss the petition without a hearing.
• Wright v. United States Bd. OF Parole & United States
  557 F.2d 74· 6th Cir.· 1977-06-13 ·cited 20×
  A district court lacks jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate a sentence based on the sentencing judge's subjective, unexpressed belief about future parole eligibility, especially when the Parole Commission's guidelines were published and known at the time of sentencing.
• Behn v. Timmons
  345 So. 2d 388· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-05-03 ·cited 20×
  A natural father appeals an order awarding custody of his two minor children to their maternal grandmother following the mother's death. The court reverses, holding that a natural parent has a fundamental right to custody of his children absent a finding of unfitness or clear and
• Haggard v. State OF Ala.
  550 F.2d 1019· 5th Cir.· 1977-04-14 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a federal habeas corpus petitioner must demonstrate actual prejudice to raise jury composition issues not objected to at trial, and that claims of unfair trial and ineffective assistance of counsel were not supported by the evidence or were harmless.
• Vines v. Muncy
  553 F.2d 342· 4th Cir.· 1977-03-28 ·cited 20×
  The court held that Virginia's procedure of allowing the jury to fix punishment, subject to the judge's power to suspend, does not violate the Constitution, and differences in sentencing procedures between jury and court trials do not violate equal protection.
• Hicks v. United States Bd. of Paroles & Pardons
  550 F.2d 401· 8th Cir.· 1977-02-14 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Parole Commission has no constitutional duty to provide an adversary parole hearing until the parole violator is taken into custody by execution of the warrant, even when a detainer is lodged with state authorities.
• Trahan v. Estelle
  544 F.2d 1305· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-10 ·cited 20×
  A guilty plea, entered with advice of counsel, breaks the chain of prior constitutional violations, and federal habeas relief is limited to the voluntariness and knowing character of the plea itself.
• Hayes v. Cowan
  547 F.2d 42· 6th Cir.· 1976-12-30 ·cited 20×
  A prosecutor's threat to seek a harsher sentence under an habitual criminal statute if a defendant refuses to plead guilty to a lesser charge violates due process.
• George v. Honorable Tom Blackwell
  537 F.2d 833· 5th Cir.· 1976-08-25 ·cited 20×
  Federal courts should not grant habeas corpus relief for Fourth Amendment claims if the state provided a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue.
• Hall v. McKENZIE
  537 F.2d 1232· 4th Cir.· 1976-06-28 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the West Virginia statute, as applied to the defendant's conviction for carnal knowledge of a thirteen-year-old female, does not violate the Eighth or Fourteenth Amendments.
• Miller v. Hall
  536 F.2d 967· 1st Cir.· 1976-06-23 ·cited 20×
  It was error for the district court to dismiss the entire habeas petition when some claims were exhausted and others were not; the court should have addressed the exhausted claims.
• Sapienza v. Vincent
  534 F.2d 1007· 2d Cir.· 1976-03-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a defendant's right to proceed pro se is sharply curtailed once a trial has begun, and the trial judge's assessment of prejudice versus disruption is given considerable weight.
• Murrah v. State OF Ark.
  532 F.2d 105· 8th Cir.· 1976-03-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a prima facie case of jury discrimination was established when a substantial disparity existed between the percentage of blacks in the county and the percentage on the master jury list, coupled with a jury selection process that allowed for subjective judgment
• Ford v. Louie L. Wainwright
  526 F.2d 919· 5th Cir.· 1976-02-04 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendant did not knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive his Sixth Amendment right to counsel, as the circumstances presented were coercive.
• United States ex rel. Lillian Reis v. Louie L. Wainwright
  525 F.2d 1269· 5th Cir.· 1976-01-16 ·cited 20×
  The court held that Florida's consistent refusal to recognize ineffective assistance of privately retained counsel as a basis for post-conviction relief renders exhaustion of state remedies futile for such claims. The court also held that a 1965 search of an arrestee's apartment,
• Reese v. United States Bd. OF Parole
  530 F.2d 231· 9th Cir.· 1976-01-12 ·cited 20×
  The court should have required an early parole revocation hearing for parolees with detainers based on new convictions.
• Chase v. Crisp
  523 F.2d 595· 10th Cir.· 1975-10-14 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the introduction of evidence allegedly obtained from an illegal search and seizure, and evidence of other crimes, was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt, and thus affirmed the denial of the writ of habeas corpus.
• Brooks v. Rose
  520 F.2d 775· 6th Cir.· 1975-07-30 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a conviction based on no evidence of sanity, despite overwhelming expert testimony of insanity, violates due process.
• Gus Albert Johnson v. Mason F. Holley
  528 F.2d 116· 7th Cir.· 1975-07-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing claims based on the dismissal of a parole violator's warrant, but remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the reasonableness of the delay in holding the parole revocation hearing and the necessity of counsel.
• United States ex rel. Kazuyuki Sakaguchi v. Kaulukukui
  520 F.2d 726· 9th Cir.· 1975-07-09 ·cited 20×
  The court held that authenticated depositions and warrants are admissible in extradition hearings, and that sufficient competent evidence existed to support the finding of extraditability, even if some evidence was hearsay.
• Hayes v. Secretary OF Defense
  515 F.2d 668· D.C. Cir.· 1975-07-03 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a servicemember seeking a discharge from the Army need not exhaust remedies before the Army Board for Correction of Military Records after exhausting regular administrative channels.
• Wallace v. Kern
  520 F.2d 400· 2d Cir.· 1975-06-30 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court's order mandating specific bail hearing procedures constituted an improper intrusion into the state judicial system, violating principles of comity and federalism.
• McLAUGHLIN v. Vinzant
  522 F.2d 448· 1st Cir.· 1975-06-18 ·cited 20×
  The admission of a codefendant's out-of-court statement, admissible under the spontaneous utterance exception to the hearsay rule, did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment confrontation clause rights. Prejudicial publicity did not violate the defendant's Fourteenth Amendme