7,506 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 5,490 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
The court held that ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel does not constitute cause to excuse a procedural default, and inaccurate parole advice does not automatically taint a guilty plea without proof of prejudice.
-
A trial court's policy to refuse bond for defendants charged with new offenses while on pretrial release is contrary to Florida statutes and case law.
-
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to a new trial due to the jury not being given the option to convict of a lesser included offense and ineffective assistance of counsel.
-
A jury instruction allowing an inference of reckless driving solely from evidence of excessive speed is constitutionally deficient and requires reversal unless the error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
The court held that a rule prohibiting discrimination in the selection of North Carolina grand jury foremen would be a new rule of law under Teague v. Lane, making the claim not cognizable in federal habeas corpus. The court also held that Nickerson failed to establish a prima fa
-
971 F.2d 510·
10th Cir.·
1992-07-23
·cited 4×
The court held that the District Director's denial of parole was not supported by individualized, factually based reasons, and thus constituted an abuse of discretion.
-
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, holding that Bobo's silence was not an invocation of his right to remain silent and that his ineffective assistance of counsel claim was procedurally defaulted.
-
-
968 F.2d 298·
2d Cir.·
1992-07-10
·cited 4×
A non-material omission in a magistrate judge's report regarding the consequences of failing to object does not excuse a pro se litigant's untimely objection if clear notice was otherwise provided.
-
966 F.2d 552·
10th Cir.·
1992-06-01
·cited 4×
The court held that the petitioner is not entitled to mandatory parole because Colorado sex offender parole statutes, as interpreted by Colorado courts, grant discretionary parole, and this interpretation was foreseeable, thus not violating due process.
-
The court held that the jury instructions on reasonable doubt announced a new rule not retroactively applicable to this habeas corpus case, and that the defendant was competent throughout his trial. The court also found that the confession was admissible and that no Brady violati
-
964 F.2d 745·
8th Cir.·
1992-05-13
·cited 4×
A habeas petitioner is not 'in custody' under a conviction if the sentence has expired at the time the petition is filed, unless the petition specifically challenges a current sentence enhanced by the prior conviction.
-
The court held that the jury instructions violated due process and were not harmless error, entitling the petitioner to habeas relief, but that the double jeopardy claim failed due to jury confusion.
-
959 F.2d 1457·
9th Cir.·
1992-03-26
·cited 4×
A state prisoner's failure to seek direct review in the state's highest court is excused if prior state court rulings created confusion or uncertainty about the necessity of such review, thus not barring federal habeas relief.
-
The court held that an application for a certificate of probable cause, filed timely, can serve as a notice of appeal, but the appeal is dismissed for failure to exhaust state remedies.
-
The court held that the petitioner procedurally defaulted on most claims and that the remaining claim regarding the jury instruction did not constitute a miscarriage of justice.
-
The court held that the appellant's habeas corpus petition was successive and abusive, and therefore dismissed it, denying the request for a stay of execution.
-
958 F.2d 874·
9th Cir.·
1992-03-05
·cited 4×
A federal prisoner released to a community treatment center under conditions of confinement is considered in custody and entitled to credit toward their sentence for that time.
-
956 F.2d 68·
5th Cir.·
1992-02-27
·cited 4×
The court denied the defendant's request for a stay of execution and a certificate of probable cause to appeal, finding he failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right or a substantial case on the merits.
-
957 F.2d 1048·
2d Cir.·
1992-02-26
·cited 4×
The district court erred by failing to defer to state court findings of fact regarding the effect of the Yamin letter on the petitioner's guilty plea.
-
956 F.2d 788·
8th Cir.·
1992-02-07
·cited 4×
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no due process violation from the admission of prior bad acts evidence and no constitutional insufficiency of evidence.
-
The dissenting judge argues that exceptional circumstances justify recalling the court's mandate to reconsider a prior en banc decision that incorrectly vacated a death sentence.
-
953 F.2d 404·
8th Cir.·
1992-01-08
·cited 4×
A state prisoner is not entitled to federal habeas corpus relief based solely on a state court's alleged misinterpretation of state law, and there is no constitutional right to state-appointed counsel to monitor for future legislative changes that might reduce a sentence.
-
953 F.2d 761·
2d Cir.·
1992-01-07
·cited 4×
The Supplementary Extradition Treaty is not a bill of attainder because it does not impose punishment without a judicial trial.
-
A Florida appellate court denied a mother's motion for reconsideration and request for a belated appeal in a parental rights termination case, where the mother's appointed counsel failed to timely file the notice of appeal. The court certified two issues of great public importanc
-
The court held that the district court erred in dismissing a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding the failure to use exculpatory forensic evidence without an evidentiary hearing, and remanded that claim for further proceedings. Other claims of ineffective assistan
-
The per se rule for Sixth Amendment right to counsel violations does not apply when the attorney was duly licensed at the time of trial and was mentally competent, despite pending disciplinary proceedings or prior statements of incapacity.
-
The court held that the state failed to present sufficient evidence to support two aggravating circumstances found by the jury, which were necessary for the imposition of the death penalty.
-
948 F.2d 497·
8th Cir.·
1991-11-08
·cited 4×
The court held that the limitation of cross-examination designed to show a witness's motive for fabrication violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right of confrontation, and this violation was not harmless error.
-
The court held that the district court erred in granting a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the evidence was constitutionally sufficient to support the conviction and that trial counsel was not ineffective.
-
The court held that the district court should first consider whether the petitioner's habeas petition constitutes an abuse of the writ under Rule 9(b), in light of the intervening Supreme Court decision in McCleskey v. Zant.
-
942 F.2d 1143·
7th Cir.·
1991-09-05
·cited 4×
The case is moot because the adjudication imposes no legal disabilities and there is no reasonable expectation of future legal dispute between the parties.
-
The court held that the petitioner was entitled to an evidentiary hearing to develop facts regarding a police report containing impeachment evidence and his trial counsel's knowledge of it.
-
943 F.2d 204·
2d Cir.·
1991-08-27
·cited 4×
The dissenting judge would reverse the district court's judgment and remand for bail to be set, arguing that indefinite confinement violates due process.
-
942 F.2d 989·
6th Cir.·
1991-08-23
·cited 4×
The admission of a co-defendant's out-of-court statement implicating the defendant violated the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause and was not harmless error.
-
941 F.2d 956·
9th Cir.·
1991-08-12
·cited 4×
The court held that the Immigration Act of 1990 provides statutory authority for the Attorney General to detain aliens convicted of aggravated felonies who are subject to final orders of exclusion, and that such detention does not violate due process or international law.
-
944 F.2d 388·
8th Cir.·
1991-08-12
·cited 4×
A state prisoner's procedural default of federal claims in state court bars federal habeas review unless the prisoner demonstrates cause and prejudice, or a fundamental miscarriage of justice. Ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel does not constitute cause.
-
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the Parole Commission's departures from its internal manual and that the claim of 'double counting' was without merit.
-
938 F.2d 1490·
1st Cir.·
1991-07-24
·cited 4×
The court held that the trial judge did not err in conducting a private interview with a juror without defense counsel present, nor in summarily dismissing the habeas corpus petition.
-
The court held that a defendant has a due process right to be present at proceedings determining persistent offender status, and the failure to provide notice or opportunity to be present violates this right.
-
584 So. 2d 1·
Fla.·
1991-07-03
·cited 4×
Joseph Robert Spaziano petitions for habeas corpus relief, arguing that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Parker v. Dugger requires the Florida Supreme Court to reconsider his death sentence, which was imposed by the trial judge despite a jury recommendation for life imprisonm
-
The court held that even if the rule barring retrial for prosecutorial misconduct intended to provoke a mistrial could apply when the mistrial motion was denied, this case did not require such an extension because the state court found no evidence of prosecutorial intent to provo
-
937 F.2d 790·
2d Cir.·
1991-06-28
·cited 4×
The court affirmed the district court's grant of habeas relief, finding that the petitioner's appellate counsel had an actual conflict of interest that constituted a per se violation of the Sixth Amendment, making a showing of prejudice unnecessary.
-
582 So. 2d 108·
Fla. 1st DCA·
1991-06-28
·cited 4×
A death row inmate challenged the summary denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging his confinement in a high-security lockdown cell rather than regular death row. The court found his allegations sufficiently facially plausible to warrant an evidentiary hearing rather than
-
The court held that the jury instruction error for attempted murder was harmless regarding the concurrent sentences but modified the dismissal to be without prejudice due to potential future collateral consequences.
-
937 F.2d 26·
2d Cir.·
1991-06-24
·cited 4×
The court held that the inmate was denied his right to call witnesses at his disciplinary hearing, entitling him to relief on his habeas corpus petition. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of the Bivens claim, finding the alleged cruel and unusual punishment did not meet t
-
936 F.2d 1102·
10th Cir.·
1991-06-18
·cited 4×
The court held that a prisoner's due process rights were not violated by a prison's policy on calling witnesses when the prisoner refused to follow the policy's procedure for submitting written questions, thereby waiving the right to present witness testimony.
-
The court held that the exclusion of alibi testimony did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights, his counsel's performance was not ineffective, and the imposition of consecutive life sentences did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
-
579 So. 2d 922·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1991-06-04
·cited 4×
Petitioner's habeas corpus petition alleging appellate counsel incompetency was denied, but the court permitted him to pursue a Rule 3.850 motion to challenge an allegedly illegal general sentence.
-
The court held that the state trial court violated due process by permitting the defendant to withdraw his competency motion without an adequate evidentiary hearing, despite evidence raising sufficient doubt about his mental competency.