Habeas Corpus

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

• Breen v. Beto
  341 F.2d 96· 5th Cir.· 1965-01-28 ·cited 18×
  The court held that informing the jury of prior offenses in an indictment under the Texas Habitual Offenders Statute does not violate due process.
• Pineda v. Bailey
  340 F.2d 162· 5th Cir.· 1965-01-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the appellant was denied his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel due to his attorney's inadequate preparation, representation, and post-trial actions.
• Richardson v. Markley
  339 F.2d 967· 7th Cir.· 1965-01-11 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner's constitutional rights were not violated by the failure to hold a preliminary interview after his arrest for parole violation, as the Board's rules at the time did not mandate such a hearing.
• Vicko Glavic v. Beechie
  340 F.2d 91· 5th Cir.· 1964-12-18 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief, finding the issues presented were correctly decided below.
• Walker v. Taylor
  338 F.2d 945· 10th Cir.· 1964-12-08 ·cited 18×
  The court held that aggregating sentences for parole eligibility is proper and that the determination of parole eligibility dates is within the discretion of the Board of Parole.
• Abel v. Tinsley
  338 F.2d 514· 10th Cir.· 1964-11-24 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the allegations of fraud were insufficient to warrant a hearing on a motion in the nature of coram nobis, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion without a hearing.
• Woodman J. Collins v. Walker
  335 F.2d 417· 5th Cir.· 1964-07-21 ·cited 18×
  The court should decree the nullity of the indictment based on a violation of state law regarding jury selection, rather than reaching a constitutional question.
• Forsythe v. State OF Ohio
  333 F.2d 678· 6th Cir.· 1964-06-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Declaratory Judgment Act cannot be used as a substitute for other post-conviction remedies like habeas corpus.
• Hobson v. Crouse
  332 F.2d 561· 10th Cir.· 1964-06-09 ·cited 18×
  A court's power to try a person is not impaired by forcible abduction into its jurisdiction.
• United States v. Maroney
  319 F.2d 622· 3d Cir.· 1963-06-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the withholding of the appellant's written statement to the police, which recited Diehl's oral declaration of a struggle, did not violate due process because the jury had sufficient evidence of a struggle from other sources and the defendant's primary defense
• Wolfe v. Elbert V. Nash
  313 F.2d 393· 8th Cir.· 1963-01-31 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the generality of the voir dire examination, publicity, or other alleged errors constituted a denial of his constitutional right to a fair trial.
• Watson v. Cameron
  312 F.2d 878· D.C. Cir.· 1962-12-20 ·cited 18×
  A person confined for over a year without an independent examination is entitled, as a matter of right, to such an examination to test hospital staff findings.
• Mellott Faust v. State OF N.C.
  307 F.2d 869· 4th Cir.· 1962-09-06 ·cited 18×
  A conviction is not a denial of due process if there is *some* evidence, even if insufficient under state law.
• Wiman v. Argo
  308 F.2d 674· 5th Cir.· 1962-08-31 ·cited 18×
  The court concurred in the result, finding that state remedies were adequate and federal review of state convictions should be limited.
• United States ex rel. John A. Easterling v. Wilkins
  303 F.2d 883· 2d Cir.· 1962-06-05 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas corpus petition without a full inquiry into the fairness of the South Carolina conviction, especially given the petitioner's claims of illiteracy and lack of counsel.
• Hobbs v. Pepersack
  301 F.2d 875· 4th Cir.· 1962-03-29 ·cited 18×
  The District Court erred in denying the petition as repetitive without considering the merits, as the petitioner's claim of unconstitutional denial of counsel was substantial and had never been adjudicated on its merits.
• Larios v. Madigan
  299 F.2d 98· 9th Cir.· 1962-01-26 ·cited 18×
  A federal sentence does not begin to run until the prisoner is received at a place of detention to await transportation for service of the sentence, and a sentencing judge's recommendation for concurrent state confinement is not binding.
• Shelton v. United States
  292 F.2d 346· 7th Cir.· 1961-07-13 ·cited 18×
  A guilty plea does not necessarily preclude a challenge to the conviction based on constitutional violations occurring prior to the plea, especially when the plea may have been involuntary.
• Frierson v. Rogers
  289 F.2d 234· 5th Cir.· 1961-04-21 ·cited 18×
  Statutory good time commutation credits do not reduce the sentence itself, but rather the time of confinement, and remain subject to forfeiture.
• Linden v. Dickson
  287 F.2d 55· 9th Cir.· 1961-01-31 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a district court is not required to hold a hearing or examine the state court record if the allegations of fact in a habeas corpus application, even if true, would not entitle the applicant to relief.
• Linus Pauling v. Eastland
  288 F.2d 126· D.C. Cir.· 1960-09-07 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a federal court lacks jurisdiction to issue a declaratory judgment or injunction against a congressional committee's inquiry before a contempt citation has been issued and a justiciable controversy has arisen.
• Smith v. United States
  252 F.2d 369· 5th Cir.· 1958-02-28 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the motion to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 was properly denied because the appellant failed to allege sufficient facts to support his claims of error and did not demonstrate that the sentence was void or subject to collateral attack.
• Toliver v. United States
  249 F.2d 804· 9th Cir.· 1957-11-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is only available to a prisoner claiming the right to be released, and since the appellant was already serving a valid sentence, he could not invoke the statute.
• Burwell v. Harley O. Teets
  245 F.2d 154· 9th Cir.· 1957-05-03 ·cited 18×
  The court found no constitutional rights of the defendants were violated and that the trial was fair and impartial.
• ALM v. United States
  238 F.2d 604· 8th Cir.· 1956-12-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a motion to vacate a sentence under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 is a collateral attack, and defects in the indictment are not grounds for such an attack after a guilty plea and conviction.
• United States v. Shaughnessy
  233 F.2d 705· 2d Cir.· 1956-05-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Board of Immigration Appeals did not err in denying suspension of deportation as a matter of administrative discretion, even if the appellants met the statutory eligibility requirements, and that considering the policy of a later Act in exercising discreti
• State of Fla. ex rel. Philip van Eeghen v. Williams
  87 So. 2d 45· Fla.· 1956-04-24 ·cited 18×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the trial court's denial of bail for Van Eeghen, who was charged with first-degree murder in a capital case. The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to meet the constitutional standard of 'proof evident or presumption great'
• Volney Davis v. United States
  226 F.2d 834· 8th Cir.· 1955-11-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner competently and intelligently waived his constitutional right to counsel at arraignment and sentencing, and was not misled about the potential sentence.
• State of Utah v. Sullivan
  227 F.2d 511· 10th Cir.· 1955-10-27 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioners' convictions and sentences were not rendered void by any violation of their rights under the Fourteenth Amendment, despite claims of lack of counsel at various stages and other procedural issues.
• LEE v. Swope
  225 F.2d 674· 9th Cir.· 1955-09-14 ·cited 18×
  A petition for a writ of habeas corpus will not be granted if the petitioner is held under a valid, unexpired sentence, even if another sentence is being challenged.
• Hyun v. Landon
  219 F.2d 404· 9th Cir.· 1955-01-31 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the appellant was not denied due process during deportation proceedings, and the deportation order was supported by substantial evidence.
• Talcott v. Reed
  217 F.2d 360· 9th Cir.· 1954-10-23 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the original IV-F classification was immaterial and that the petitioner waived his right to personal appearance by excusing himself due to distance and expense. The court also found the regulation regarding pregnancy as an excuse for failure to serve to be jus
• United States ex rel. Elliott v. Hendricks
  213 F.2d 922· 3d Cir.· 1954-06-02 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding that the federal court's review of state court proceedings under habeas corpus is constitutional and that the relator had not demonstrated a lack of fundamental fairness amounting to a due process violation.
• McKINNEY v. Finletter
  205 F.2d 761· 10th Cir.· 1953-06-25 ·cited 18×
  A sentence exceeding authorized punishment does not invalidate the legally authorized portion if the excess is separable.
• United States ex rel. Ciannamea v. Neelly
  202 F.2d 289· 7th Cir.· 1953-02-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the relator received a fair hearing and that the hearing officer did not abuse his discretion in denying discretionary relief for voluntary departure.
• Dixon v. Duffy
  344 U.S. 143· U.S.· 1952-12-08 ·cited 18×
  The dissent argues that the Court should not vacate a state court judgment simply because the state court has not provided a formal opinion explaining its reasoning.
• Risken v. United States
  197 F.2d 959· 8th Cir.· 1952-07-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a motion to vacate a sentence under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 is a collateral attack, and objections to the indictment's sufficiency, if not raised at trial or on direct appeal, are waived unless the indictment is fundamentally defective.
• Fowler v. Ross
  196 F.2d 25· D.C. Cir.· 1952-03-27 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a person convicted of a crime in a state, who is not physically present in that state when the crime occurred, cannot be extradited if they flee to another jurisdiction after arrest and conviction.
• United States v. Lavelle
  194 F.2d 202· 2d Cir.· 1952-01-28 ·cited 18×
  The District Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain a motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 when the movant had fully served the sentence being challenged.
• Carlson v. Landon
  187 F.2d 991· 9th Cir.· 1951-03-13 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Attorney General's discretion to deny bail to aliens deemed active Communists was not arbitrary or capricious, provided some factual basis was revealed.
• Wild v. State OF Okla.
  187 F.2d 409· 10th Cir.· 1951-02-21 ·cited 18×
  A federal court should not grant a writ of habeas corpus based on perjured testimony unless it was knowingly used by prosecuting officers.
• Hudspeth v. United States
  183 F.2d 68· 6th Cir.· 1950-06-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently alleged criminal intent and that the motion to vacate the sentence was not the proper avenue for the alleged error.
• United States v. Hall
  176 F.2d 163· 2d Cir.· 1949-07-14 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the contempt orders and the dismissal of the writs of habeas corpus were valid, as the contempt was committed in the court's presence and punished summarily according to rule.
• Martin v. Hiatt
  174 F.2d 350· 5th Cir.· 1949-05-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that 28 U.S.C. § 2255 does not suspend the writ of habeas corpus but rather provides an alternative remedy. Therefore, a prisoner must first seek relief under § 2255 before filing a habeas corpus petition.
• Hunter v. Thomas
  173 F.2d 810· 10th Cir.· 1949-03-17 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court's order granting a rehearing was void because it was not made within the time prescribed by Rule 59(d) for sua sponte action, and thus the original order discharging the petitioner was reinstated.
• Henry v. Hodges
  171 F.2d 401· 2d Cir.· 1948-11-29 ·cited 18×
  Formal defects in preliminary investigation do not divest a court-martial of jurisdiction if the accused received the substance of the protection intended by statute. Discretionary decisions regarding court martial composition are not subject to review without evidence of abuse.
• Behrens v. Hironimus
  170 F.2d 627· 4th Cir.· 1948-11-08 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to prove denial of federal constitutional rights, and her waiver of counsel and guilty plea were voluntary and intelligent.
• Smith v. Hiatt
  170 F.2d 61· 3d Cir.· 1948-09-14 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court's conclusion that the requirements of Article of War 70 were complied with and a thorough and impartial investigation was made prior to trial should be allowed to stand.
• Owens v. Hunter
  169 F.2d 971· 3d Cir.· 1948-07-30 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the judgment in the criminal case was not void, and therefore the petition for habeas corpus was properly denied.
• United States ex rel. Lapides v. Watkins
  165 F.2d 1017· 2d Cir.· 1948-02-06 ·cited 18×
  A naturalized citizen who resides abroad for over five years loses citizenship under the Nationality Act of 1940, and a consular certificate of identity does not estop the government from enforcing this loss.