Habeas Corpus

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

• Cook v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n
  749 F.2d 678· 11th Cir.· 1985-01-02 ·cited 19×
  The court held that while state delays can excuse the exhaustion requirement, the circumstances here do not warrant excusing it, but the district court should allow the petitioner to choose whether to proceed in state court without his presence.
• Mitchell v. Scully
  746 F.2d 951· 2d Cir.· 1984-10-23 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding an affirmative defense lacked merit because there was no reasonable probability that the defense would have succeeded or resulted in a more favorable outcome.
• United States v. United States Parole Comm'n
  732 F.2d 849· 11th Cir.· 1984-05-21 ·cited 19×
  The case is moot because the appellant has been released on parole, and a favorable decision would not provide any additional relief.
• Cornell Jackson v. Wyrick
  730 F.2d 1177· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-29 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the repeated interrogations of the petitioner did not violate his Miranda rights because the police scrupulously honored his right to cut off questioning.
• Kamrin v. United States
  725 F.2d 1225· 9th Cir.· 1984-02-14 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the United States statute of limitations does not apply to extradition proceedings when the treaty does not provide for it, and US due process rights do not extend extraterritorially to bar extradition.
• Walker v. A.L. Lockhart
  726 F.2d 1238· 8th Cir.· 1984-01-18 ·cited 19×
  The court, sitting en banc, granted a petition for recall of mandate and remanded the case to the district court to take evidence on new factual issues. These issues include testimony from Russell Kumpe and his former wife regarding Kumpe's alleged firing of a gun, and the admiss
• Tucker v. Francis
  723 F.2d 1504· 11th Cir.· 1984-01-16 ·cited 19×
• Alston v. Garrison
  720 F.2d 812· 4th Cir.· 1983-11-03 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the failure of trial counsel to object to evidence of the defendant's post-arrest silence, in violation of Doyle v. Ohio, constituted ineffective assistance of counsel and was not harmless error.
• Finney v. Zant
  709 F.2d 643· 11th Cir.· 1983-07-11 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the denial of an independent psychiatric expert and the defendant's brief absence from trial did not violate constitutional rights, but the jury instructions on mitigating circumstances were constitutionally deficient, requiring resentencing.
• Todd v. Alton Baskerville
  712 F.2d 70· 4th Cir.· 1983-07-06 ·cited 19×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the Holsey action as frivolous but remanded the Todd action for the district court to determine if changed circumstances (release from custody) would permit a § 1983 action without state exhaustion.
• Seymour X Cotton, Jr. v. Mabry
  674 F.2d 701· 8th Cir.· 1982-03-31 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the petitioner's delay in attacking his 1969 guilty plea was not unreasonable and the state's destruction of evidence did not establish prejudice to bar review under laches.
• Bowman v. Wilson
  672 F.2d 1145· 3d Cir.· 1982-02-08 ·cited 19×
  A serviceman under court-martial lacks standing to challenge pending proceedings based on subsequent criminal activity subjecting him to another jurisdiction's authority. Habeas corpus relief is barred by the doctrines of exhaustion of military remedies and Younger abstention.
• Alderman v. Austin
  663 F.2d 558· 5th Cir.· 1981-12-11 ·cited 19×
• United States ex rel. Fred del Genio v. United States Bureau OF Prisons
  644 F.2d 585· 7th Cir.· 1980-09-09 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the petitioner's mandatory release date was calculated correctly, and his term of imprisonment has not been fully served.
• Simmons v. Braun
  627 F.2d 635· 2d Cir.· 1980-08-14 ·cited 19×
  The exclusionary rule does not apply to extradition hearings, and the evidence presented was sufficient for extraditability.
• Haitian Refugee Ctr. v. Civiletti
  503 F. Supp. 442· S.D. Fla.· 1980-07-02 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the district court has jurisdiction to review claims alleging procedural irregularities in the Immigration and Naturalization Service's (INS) processing of asylum claims, distinguishing these from direct challenges to final deportation orders which are exclusi
• Lofton v. Louie L. Wainwright
  620 F.2d 74· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-25 ·cited 19×
  The court held that a prosecutor may impeach a defendant's trial testimony by referencing prior post-arrest statements, even if the defendant later invoked their right to silence or counsel, provided the defendant initially waived their right to remain silent and made admissions.
• Lenhard v. Wolff
  443 U.S. 1306· U.S.· 1979-09-07 ·cited 19×
  Appellants appeal their convictions for possession of cannabis with intent to sell and importation of a controlled substance, challenging the denial of their motions to suppress evidence seized after an allegedly illegal stop and the denial of their motions to withdraw their nolo
• Skipper v. Louie L. Wainwright
  598 F.2d 425· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-06 ·cited 19×
  The court held that a factual dispute regarding counsel's bar admission requires remand for further fact-finding, while other claims were properly denied.
• Bolius v. Louie L. Wainwright
  597 F.2d 986· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-29 ·cited 19×
  The court affirmed the district court's finding that the petitioner was competent to plead guilty, and that a nunc pro tunc hearing was permissible.
• Breazeale v. Bradley
  582 F.2d 5· 5th Cir.· 1978-10-10 ·cited 19×
  The court held that a federal habeas corpus petition must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, as the petitioner was in custody in Alabama and not Florida.
• United States v. Hollis
  569 F.2d 199· 3d Cir.· 1977-12-29 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the trial court erred in placing the burden of proving incompetency on the habeas petitioner when the issue of competency was raised but not litigated prior to conviction.
• Kolski v. Garland Watkins
  544 F.2d 762· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-03 ·cited 19×
  Federal courts must abstain from granting habeas relief from a pending state criminal prosecution unless extraordinary circumstances demonstrate irreparable injury, bad faith, or harassment.
• Pressley v. Louie L. Wainwright
  540 F.2d 818· 5th Cir.· 1976-10-15 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the prisoner's right to petition for certiorari was frustrated by the state's failure to timely act, constituting ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Booton v. Hanauer
  541 F.2d 296· 1st Cir.· 1976-09-02 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the introduction of the petitioner's refusal to answer further questions during a police interview was constitutional error but harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and affirmed the denial of the writ of habeas corpus.
• United States ex rel. Walter Bibbs v. Twomey
  506 F.2d 1220· 7th Cir.· 1974-12-09 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the record was insufficient to determine if the manner of introducing prior convictions denied due process, requiring remand for further proceedings.
• Steigler v. Anderson
  496 F.2d 793· 3d Cir.· 1974-04-18 ·cited 19×
  The court held that warrantless seizure of arson evidence by firemen and police during and immediately after a fire is permissible under exigent circumstances, and that the appellant's statements made during police interviews were not the product of custodial interrogation requir
• Bassett v. Smith
  464 F.2d 347· 5th Cir.· 1972-07-17 ·cited 19×
  The dissenting judge argues that the ruling in Smith v. Smith should be applied retroactively, disagreeing with the majority's balancing of factors.
• Hoover v. Beto
  439 F.2d 913· 5th Cir.· 1971-03-09 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the admission of evidence obtained through an invalid search warrant and the admission of hearsay testimony implicating the defendant violated his constitutional rights.
• Fernandez v. Meier
  432 F.2d 426· 9th Cir.· 1970-10-05 ·cited 19×
  The court held that there is no constitutional right to inspect a presentence report and that denial of such inspection, absent abuse of discretion or prejudice, does not violate due process.
• United States ex rel. Dossie Walls v. Mancusi
  406 F.2d 505· 2d Cir.· 1969-01-24 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the search and seizure of money from the relator was incident to a lawful arrest and therefore admissible, and that a trial judge's comment, while potentially improper, did not prejudice the relator's substantial rights.
• Benson v. State OF Cal.
  328 F.2d 159· 9th Cir.· 1964-02-14 ·cited 19×
  A petitioner seeking enlargement on bail pending appeal of a habeas corpus denial is not entitled to bail absent special circumstances, and the impending release from jail does not render the case moot.
• Rodriguez v. State
  119 So. 2d 681· Fla.· 1960-04-13 ·cited 19×
  A prisoner's petition for habeas corpus seeking release based on time served under a deferred sentence is premature if no sentence was actually imposed.
• State of Fla. ex rel. Rose Miller v. Kelly
  88 So. 2d 118· Fla.· 1956-06-06 ·cited 19×
  A defendant who moves for and is granted a new trial waives any claim of double jeopardy, and the materiality of testimony is a question for the jury if properly preserved.
• State v. HON. Jimmy Sullivan
  158 Fla. 870· Fla.· 1947-05-09 ·cited 19×
  Joe Griffin was arrested for violating a Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission rule regulating the taking of fresh water fish. Griffin claimed he acted in good faith under state statutes declaring certain waters salt water and authorizing fish-taking. The Florida Supreme Court hel
• McCREA v. Jackson
  148 F.2d 193· 6th Cir.· 1945-04-04 ·cited 19×
  A federal court will entertain a state prisoner's habeas corpus petition only after the petitioner has exhausted all available state remedies, including the possibility of a delayed motion for a new trial under Michigan law.
• Sparkman v. State Prison Custodian
  154 Fla. 688· Fla.· 1944-07-11 ·cited 19×
  Clyde Sparkman petitioned for habeas corpus relief, claiming he was unlawfully imprisoned under a 10-year sentence for narcotic drug violations when the statute authorized only 5 years for a first offense. The Florida Supreme Court held that Sparkman's conviction constituted a fi
• Snow v. Roche
  143 F.2d 718· 9th Cir.· 1944-06-30 ·cited 19×
  The court held that a writ of mandamus would not issue because the underlying petition for habeas corpus did not state a claim for illegal detention, which is the sole purpose of the writ.
• Bronemann v. United States (three cases)
  138 F.2d 333· 8th Cir.· 1943-10-28 ·cited 19×
  The court held that evidence of arbitrary or unfair classification by draft boards is not a defense to a charge of refusing to obey a draft order.
• Bozel v. Hudspeth
  126 F.2d 585· 10th Cir.· 1942-03-03 ·cited 19×
  The court held that habeas corpus is not an appropriate remedy to correct alleged errors of law occurring in a trial over which the court had jurisdiction, including claims of illegal search and seizure or improper removal.
• State v. Coleman
  148 Fla. 155· Fla.· 1941-09-16 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the Act's population-based classification for regulating alcoholic beverage sales was unreasonable and arbitrary, rendering the Act void as a special or local law.
• Botwinski v. Dowd
  118 F.2d 829· 7th Cir.· 1941-03-06 ·cited 19×
  The appeal is dismissed because it was not properly before the court due to the absence of a required certificate of probable cause.
• In re Clayton
  829 F.3d 1254· 11th Cir.· 2016-07-18 ·cited 18×
  The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in a concurring opinion, criticizes its own prior decisions that have erected barriers to relief for individuals sentenced under the unconstitutionally vague residual clause of the career offender sentencing enhancement. The concurring judge
• Jimenez v. State
  196 So. 3d 499· Fla. 3d DCA· 2016-07-13 ·cited 18×
  Diego Jimenez appeals an order prohibiting him from filing further pro se pleadings related to his 2003 criminal convictions and 60-year sentence. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the prohibition, finding that Jimenez's filing of numerous successive, meritless motions
• Jarvis D. Coleman v. State
  128 So. 3d 193· Fla. 5th DCA· 2013-12-06 ·cited 18×
  Jarvis Coleman sought habeas corpus relief claiming manifest injustice stemming from his second-degree murder conviction. The court granted the petition, finding that appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to file a supplemental brief raising the Montgomery decision during
• Shellito v. State
  121 So. 3d 445· Fla.· 2013-07-03 ·cited 18×
  Michael Wayne Shellito was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. On appeal, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction but reversed and remanded for a new penalty phase, finding his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately investigate and
• Gould v. State
  974 So. 2d 441· Fla. 2d DCA· 2007-12-19 ·cited 18×
  Stephen Gould petitioned for certiorari review of a circuit court's denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging a magistrate's finding of probable cause for a DUI arrest. The appellate court granted certiorari, holding that a uniform traffic citation alone—particularly one s
• K.E. v. Dep't OF Juv. Just.
  963 So. 2d 864· Fla. 1st DCA· 2007-08-14 ·cited 18×
  K.E., a child accused of misdemeanor battery and resisting arrest, challenged her detention in a juvenile delinquency case via habeas corpus. The court granted the petition, finding that the trial judges violated Florida's detention statutes by failing to provide clear and convin
• Richardson v. Fla. Parole Comm'n
  924 So. 2d 908· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-03-23 ·cited 18×
  Richardson, an inmate on conditional release supervision, challenges the Florida Parole Commission's revocation of his release after a hearing examiner found him not guilty of alleged violations. The appellate court grants certiorari, holding that the Commission impermissibly rej
• Hakkenberg v. State
  889 So. 2d 935· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-12-17 ·cited 18×
  Hakkenberg petitioned for relief based on ineffective assistance of appellate counsel for failing to preserve a sentencing error claim. The court granted the petition on the ground that appellate counsel should have filed a motion to correct sentencing error when Hakkenberg was r