Habeas Corpus

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

• Gallie v. Wainwright
  362 So. 2d 936· Fla.· 1978-09-14 ·cited 18×
  Roland Gallie, convicted of cocaine possession, sought bond pending appeal of his conviction. The Florida Supreme Court upheld a statute and criminal rule prohibiting bail pending appeal for previously convicted felons whose civil rights have not been restored, rejecting both equ
• Singleton v. The Honorable Louis J. Lefkowitz
  583 F.2d 618· 2d Cir.· 1978-09-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion by denying a continuance for an absent witness when the defense failed to show the witness's testimony would be relevant, material, and favorable.
• Powell v. State
  579 F.2d 324· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-30 ·cited 18×
  A state must afford insanity acquitees substantially the same procedural protections as those in ordinary civil commitment, but may treat them differently if the distinction serves a legitimate state interest.
• Ross v. Wyrick
  581 F.2d 172· 8th Cir.· 1978-07-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a significant statistical disparity between the percentage of black residents in the county and the percentage of black individuals on the master jury list, coupled with the opportunity for discrimination in the selection process, establishes a prima facie cas
• Wood v. Superintendent Robert F. Zahradnick
  578 F.2d 980· 4th Cir.· 1978-07-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a defense lawyer's failure to investigate potential insanity defenses, specifically by seeking a psychiatric evaluation, constitutes ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment.
• Tennon v. Ricketts
  574 F.2d 1243· 5th Cir.· 1978-06-13 ·cited 18×
  A fugitive's inability to comply with state procedural rules for challenging grand jury composition, caused by their own flight, does not violate due process and does not excuse timely filing requirements.
• de Peralta v. Garrison
  575 F.2d 749· 9th Cir.· 1978-05-24 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Parole Commission improperly applied the 1976 Parole Commission and Reorganization Act retroactively to deny parole, and that reconsideration should be based on the law in effect at the time of sentencing.
• Robinson v. Benson
  570 F.2d 920· 10th Cir.· 1978-02-24 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a prisoner's due process rights were not violated in parole rescission proceedings where he received notice, was represented by a staff member, had access to files, and there was sufficient support for the rescission decision.
• Mitchell v. Rose
  570 F.2d 129· 6th Cir.· 1978-01-09 ·cited 18×
  A prima facie case of racial discrimination in the selection of grand jury foremen, if unrebutted, requires setting aside the conviction, even if the foreman did not vote on the indictment.
• Rimmer v. The Fayetteville Police Dept.
  567 F.2d 273· 4th Cir.· 1977-12-20 ·cited 18×
  The doctrine of collateral estoppel forecloses a plaintiff from relitigating issues decided in a prior state court conviction, even in a subsequent civil rights action, provided the plaintiff had access to a federal forum for adjudication of the federal claim.
• Blackwell v. Lou V. Brewer
  562 F.2d 596· 8th Cir.· 1977-10-05 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the state has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's absence from the courtroom during the interrogation of the jury amounted to harmless error, and that the issue of waiver was not resolved.
• Gardner v. Pogue
  558 F.2d 548· 9th Cir.· 1977-08-01 ·cited 18×
  An appellate court lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a denial of a state prisoner's habeas corpus petition unless the district court judge who denied the petition has issued a certificate of probable cause or stated reasons for denial. Permission to proceed in forma paupe
• Standlee v. Rhay
  557 F.2d 1303· 9th Cir.· 1977-07-21 ·cited 18×
  Collateral estoppel does not bar a parole revocation hearing after a criminal acquittal because parole revocation is a remedial, not punitive, proceeding with a lower burden of proof.
• United States ex rel. Rev. Frank Robert Cordee Hahn v. Mr. Vernon Revis & United States Bd. of Paroles & Pardons
  560 F.2d 264· 7th Cir.· 1977-07-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a parolee imprisoned for a new crime is not entitled to a prompt parole revocation hearing when a warrant is lodged as a detainer, but not served, until custody is assumed under the warrant.
• Stimack v. State OF Tex. & W. J. Estelle, Jr.
  548 F.2d 588· 5th Cir.· 1977-03-11 ·cited 18×
  The court held that juror testimony about extraneous influences is admissible to impeach a verdict, and the errors were not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Fronczak v. Warden, EL Reno Reformatory, EL Reno, Okla. & United States Bd. of Parole
  553 F.2d 1219· 10th Cir.· 1977-03-03 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the reasons provided for denying parole release satisfied the Administrative Procedure Act and due process requirements, and that the application of parole guidelines was permissible under the Federal Youth Corrections Act.
• Chenault v. Stynchcombe
  546 F.2d 1191· 5th Cir.· 1977-02-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court's failure to hold a competency hearing did not violate federal constitutional standards because no bona fide doubt of competency was raised.
• Ellsworth Youngbear v. Lou V. Brewer
  549 F.2d 74· 8th Cir.· 1977-02-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Federal Major Crimes Act, as amended by Public Law 846, preserves exclusive federal jurisdiction over major crimes committed by Indians in Indian country, and therefore the State of Iowa lacked jurisdiction to try the defendant for murder.
• Greene v. Massey
  546 F.2d 51· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a defendant who successfully seeks a reversal of a conviction based on insufficient evidence, after making a motion for a new trial, can be retried without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• Bond v. State OF Okla.
  546 F.2d 1369· 10th Cir.· 1976-12-20 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the admission of a co-defendant's confession, while constitutional error, was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given the overwhelming independent evidence of guilt. Other claims regarding improper conviction, denial of hearings, severance, and prejudicial ev
• Jones v. Wyrick
  542 F.2d 1013· 8th Cir.· 1976-10-14 ·cited 18×
  The court held that while the cross-examination regarding post-arrest silence was a Doyle violation, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming evidence and corrective jury instructions.
• Bloodworth v. Hopper
  539 F.2d 1382· 5th Cir.· 1976-10-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that even if an identification procedure is impermissibly suggestive, the conviction may stand if the identification is otherwise reliable.
• Marsh v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  536 F.2d 1287· 9th Cir.· 1976-06-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the state court's determination that jury instructions, though improper, did not violate constitutional rights, and that the absence of exceptions precluded reversal absent manifest error, was not an unreasonable application of federal law.
• Hogan v. The State OF Neb. & Vernon Newbold
  535 F.2d 458· 8th Cir.· 1976-05-13 ·cited 18×
  The court held that errors in admitting evidence in state court are not grounds for federal habeas corpus relief unless they violate a specific federal constitutional provision or amount to a denial of due process.
• Potts v. Estelle
  529 F.2d 450· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the appellant's habeas petition, as the allegations regarding uncounseled misdemeanor convictions used for impeachment raised a valid constitutional claim.
• Martinez v. Estelle
  527 F.2d 1330· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-05 ·cited 18×
  The imposition of a longer sentence after retrial, when the disparity results from the defendant's strategic choice rather than prosecutorial vindictiveness, does not violate due process.
• Tyler v. Swenson
  527 F.2d 877· 8th Cir.· 1976-01-06 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust his available state remedies regarding the issue of sentence reconsideration based on an invalid prior conviction.
• Bell v. W. J
  525 F.2d 656· 5th Cir.· 1975-12-31 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a state court's failure to strictly comply with a state statute in accepting a guilty plea does not raise a federal constitutional question if the plea was knowing and voluntary. Furthermore, the court held that a challenge to a nunc pro tunc sentence amendmen
• Harvey v. State OF S.D.
  526 F.2d 840· 8th Cir.· 1975-12-11 ·cited 18×
  The federal courts lack jurisdiction to grant a writ of habeas corpus when the petitioner is no longer in custody, even if collateral consequences of the conviction remain.
• United States ex rel. Samuel D. Robinson v. Housewright
  525 F.2d 988· 7th Cir.· 1975-11-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial judge's participation in plea negotiations did not violate constitutional standards, and the defendant was not denied effective assistance of counsel due to his attorney representing multiple defendants with potentially conflicting interests.
• Schell v. Louie L. Wainwright
  322 So. 2d 897· Fla.· 1975-11-12 ·cited 18×
  Kenneth Paul Schell sought habeas corpus relief for credit toward his sentence for time served on parole before his parole was revoked. The Florida Supreme Court held that under the amended Florida Statute 947.21, credit for time satisfactorily served on parole became discretiona
• Kelley v. Estelle
  521 F.2d 238· 5th Cir.· 1975-10-17 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the denial of federal habeas corpus relief, finding the in-court identification was independent of any potentially suggestive pretrial photographic identification.
• Barnes v. Estelle
  518 F.2d 182· 5th Cir.· 1975-09-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the introduction of invalid misdemeanor convictions at sentencing was harmless error, despite the district court granting habeas corpus relief.
• Grattan v. Sigler
  525 F.2d 329· 9th Cir.· 1975-08-06 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the prisoner was entitled to a new parole hearing because the Board improperly classified his offense severity and failed to provide timely notice and reasons for the classification.
• In re Louie L. Wainwright
  518 F.2d 173· 5th Cir.· 1975-06-25 ·cited 18×
• United States ex rel. Alfred Lewis v. Henderson
  520 F.2d 896· 2d Cir.· 1975-06-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that while the state court adequately determined the issue of physical coercion, the claim of mental and psychological coercion was never sufficiently developed or passed upon, requiring a federal evidentiary hearing.
• Burks v. Egeler
  512 F.2d 221· 6th Cir.· 1975-02-06 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner's claim of a due process violation based on alleged perjury did not present a constitutional issue because there was no showing of state involvement or knowing use of false evidence by the prosecution.
• United States ex rel. William Hayward v. Johnson
  508 F.2d 322· 3d Cir.· 1975-01-28 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a juvenile's confession, obtained after Miranda warnings and considering the totality of the circumstances, was voluntary and admissible, and that the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing.
• Brown v. United States
  508 F.2d 618· 3d Cir.· 1974-12-31 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the district court, holding that decisions concerning the adjudicatory power of tribunals, like the one in Greenwell, should be applied retroactively without resort to the Linkletter-Stovall calculus.
• United States ex rel. Roger Pierce v. Cannon
  508 F.2d 197· 7th Cir.· 1974-12-31 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a pre-indictment lineup identification, even if suggestive, does not require per se exclusion if the totality of the circumstances indicates reliability.
• Williams v. Lou V. Brewer
  509 F.2d 227· 8th Cir.· 1974-12-31 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge holds that the defendant voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to counsel and right to remain silent, and his statements were not involuntary.
• Woodcock v. Amlaral
  511 F.2d 985· 1st Cir.· 1974-12-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the appellant's various claims, including Brady violations, insufficient indictment, denial of severance, improper prosecution mode, and ex post facto law application, did not warrant reversal of the habeas corpus petition dismissal.
• Settler v. Lameer
  507 F.2d 231· 9th Cir.· 1974-11-26 ·cited 18×
  The Yakima Indian Nation may enforce its fishing regulations by arresting and seizing gear off-reservation at usual and accustomed fishing places, provided violations are committed in the officer's presence. Pre-1968, tribal courts were not bound by constitutional rights like cou
• Wardell N. Smith v. Warden Charles Wolff
  506 F.2d 556· 8th Cir.· 1974-11-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a state prisoner's procedural forfeiture of state remedies does not preclude federal habeas corpus relief if the prisoner did not deliberately bypass state procedures. The court also remanded for further consideration of claims related to the voluntariness of
• Crenshaw v. Wolff
  504 F.2d 377· 8th Cir.· 1974-10-23 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner was not denied due process, the right to appeal, or effective assistance of counsel, and therefore affirmed the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Di Piero v. State
  300 So. 2d 700· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-09-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the State failed to establish a prima facie case for extradition because it did not introduce the Governor of Florida's rendition warrant into evidence.
• Stansel v. State
  297 So. 2d 63· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-06-18 ·cited 18×
  Petitioner Stansel challenged a $500,000 bond reduction in a marijuana conspiracy case on grounds that the trial court improperly considered secret in camera testimony from an undisclosed state witness. The appellate court held that such secret evidence violates fundamental confr
• McDONALD v. Louie L. Wainwright
  493 F.2d 204· 5th Cir.· 1974-04-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the state violated double jeopardy and collateral estoppel principles by prosecuting the defendant for breaking and entering with intent to commit rape after he had been acquitted of rape and attempted rape.
• Hudson v. State OF Ala.
  493 F.2d 171· 5th Cir.· 1974-04-24 ·cited 18×
  The court held that laches should not bar constitutional claims and that the petitioner received ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Collins v. Buchkoe
  493 F.2d 343· 6th Cir.· 1974-03-27 ·cited 18×
  The court held that while sentencing judges may consider unsworn information, due process requires an opportunity to rebut materially false information relied upon for sentencing.