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
-
Walter Franklin Branson, a minor at the time of his murder trial, petitioned for habeas corpus claiming his parents were not notified of charges as required by Florida law. The Florida Supreme Court denied the petition, finding that his mother had been adequately notified by regi
-
Ronald Lee Willis, a 19-year-old prisoner, petitioned for habeas corpus challenging his conviction for escape and larceny, claiming the state failed to comply with Florida's statutory requirement to notify his parents of the charges because his minor status was not properly estab
-
289 F.2d 751·
7th Cir.·
1961-04-26
·cited 4×
The court held that a court-martial conviction under the Uniform Code of Military Justice is not subject to challenge in civil courts based on the Fifth and Sixth Amendments regarding indictment and jury trial rights, as these rights do not apply to military tribunals.
-
The court held that the appellant's challenge to deportation to a country with no ties raises a substantial constitutional question, requiring a three-judge court.
-
121 So. 2d 657·
Fla.·
1960-06-22
·cited 4×
The court held that the trial court's failure to determine the petitioner's capacity to represent himself, given his age and education, raised due process concerns, and that the juvenile court's potential jurisdiction also warranted further inquiry.
-
The federal court denied habeas corpus because the prisoner failed to exhaust state remedies by not timely seeking a writ of error for his conviction.
-
274 F.2d 840·
10th Cir.·
1960-01-26
·cited 4×
The court held that a factual dispute regarding coercion vitiates a summary denial of a habeas corpus petition.
-
270 F.2d 848·
4th Cir.·
1959-10-05
·cited 4×
The court held that a petitioner seeking habeas corpus to avoid extradition must exhaust available state remedies, even in the asylum state, unless extraordinary circumstances exist.
-
267 F.2d 206·
9th Cir.·
1959-02-26
·cited 4×
The Court held that the Special Hearing Officer properly reappraised existing evidence under the ordinary burden of proof as directed, and the District Court correctly affirmed the administrative proceedings.
-
The court held that the appeal is frivolous and moot, and therefore dismissed.
-
259 F.2d 761·
7th Cir.·
1958-10-10
·cited 4×
-
258 F.2d 350·
6th Cir.·
1958-08-13
·cited 4×
The court held that the appellant was correctly determined to be ineligible for citizenship due to his application for relief from military service, thus rendering him ineligible for suspension of deportation.
-
258 F.2d 561·
9th Cir.·
1958-04-04
·cited 4×
The court held that it would appoint counsel to assist the petitioner in seeking a certificate of probable cause and permission to appeal in forma pauperis.
-
The court held that the denial of eyewitness statements was not a federal due process violation, as the Jencks rule applies only to federal criminal justice administration.
-
Irvin Hitson petitioned for habeas corpus relief, challenging a five-year sentence for aiding prisoners to escape from jail, claiming it exceeded the statutory maximum. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the sentence, holding that the applicable statute (§ 843.11) provides a ten-ye
-
The court held that the petitioner's application for habeas corpus did not allege facts showing entitlement to discharge from custody.
-
The court held that the district court's denial of the federal habeas corpus petition was soundly supported by the record, particularly regarding the alleged prejudiced juror.
-
247 F.2d 775·
9th Cir.·
1957-08-06
·cited 4×
The court held that a petition for a writ of mandamus, filed after the time for appeal had expired, could not be treated as an appeal from an order denying habeas corpus for want of jurisdiction.
-
-
243 F.2d 23·
6th Cir.·
1957-04-24
·cited 4×
The federal court denied habeas corpus relief because the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies and did not demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying federal intervention.
-
241 F.2d 318·
7th Cir.·
1957-02-20
·cited 4×
The court held that the District Court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition was proper because the relator had not yet exhausted state remedies, especially in light of a new Illinois Supreme Court rule providing a mechanism to obtain a transcript.
-
241 F.2d 188·
9th Cir.·
1957-02-08
·cited 4×
The court held that the petitioner's claims were frivolous and that the district court's certification of bad faith for an appeal was proper.
-
90 So. 2d 43·
Fla.·
1956-09-21
·cited 4×
The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court's grant of habeas corpus, holding that Florida's Uniform Enforcement of Support Act (F.S. Sec. 88.061) validly permits extradition for nonsupport crimes even when the accused was not present in the demanding state at the time of th
-
This opinion is a dissent arguing for a rehearing en banc, not a holding on the merits of the underlying case.
-
235 F.2d 801·
8th Cir.·
1956-07-17
·cited 4×
The court held that the petitioner's conviction for a narcotics offense was a sufficient basis for deportation and that the denial of discretionary relief did not constitute an abuse of discretion.
-
233 F.2d 190·
2d Cir.·
1956-05-07
·cited 4×
The court held that due process did not require the assignment of counsel to a competent defendant who knowingly and voluntarily waived that right, even in light of his history of mental illness.
-
230 F.2d 395·
9th Cir.·
1956-02-10
·cited 4×
The court held that a petitioner seeking habeas corpus must exhaust available remedies before federal courts will intervene.
-
The court held that a federal district court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a habeas corpus petition when the petitioner has not demonstrated that the remedy under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 is inadequate or ineffective.
-
The Florida Supreme Court granted a writ of habeas corpus, finding that a prisoner's sentence for unlawful possession of marijuana exceeded the statutory maximum. The court ordered the prisoner to be resentenced.
-
The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because the judgment clearly stated the intent for consecutive sentences.
-
The court held that the sentence for contempt was valid and did not terminate with the discharge of the grand jury, as it could be construed as having dual civil and criminal aspects.
-
The court held that the petitioner should have an opportunity to develop a record to determine and review his rights.
-
210 F.2d 941·
5th Cir.·
1954-03-12
·cited 4×
The court held that the Parole Board alone determines when a sentence for a conditional release violation begins, and the actions of the marshal and penitentiary staff did not alter this.
-
210 F.2d 513·
1st Cir.·
1954-02-19
·cited 4×
The court held that the appellant was not deprived of due process and that the application of the Internal Security Act of 1950 was constitutional in his deportation proceedings.
-
The dissenting judge believes the State failed to prove that promises of leniency did not continue to affect the defendant's later confessions, thus violating due process.
-
The court held that the United States was not authorized to appeal the district court's order, and the appeal was dismissed.
-
204 F.2d 353·
5th Cir.·
1953-05-15
·cited 4×
The court held that formal court records showing a defendant appeared with counsel are controlling in a collateral attack, and a discrepancy in the appointed counsel's name does not warrant release.
-
203 F.2d 196·
9th Cir.·
1953-03-31
·cited 4×
The Attorney General had no discretionary power to suspend deportation for an alien deportable for a crime involving moral turpitude.
-
202 F.2d 949·
9th Cir.·
1953-03-23
·cited 4×
The court held that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus did not state sufficient facts to entitle the petitioner to relief, and denied the certificate of probable cause.
-
202 F.2d 392·
3d Cir.·
1953-03-04
·cited 4×
The court held that the district court erred by relying on evidence not presented in the habeas corpus proceeding, including an ex parte return and testimony from a prior proceeding.
-
200 F.2d 616·
3d Cir.·
1952-12-16
·cited 4×
The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding denial of parole opportunity and illegal sentence aggregation are not grounds for habeas corpus relief because he had available state remedies and his parole violation would result in serving the same sentence.
-
199 F.2d 865·
5th Cir.·
1952-11-06
·cited 4×
The court held that a federal court cannot grant habeas corpus relief unless state remedies have been exhausted, and the petitioner failed to demonstrate such exhaustion.
-
The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to issue an order to show cause against the U.S. Marshal, but the denial of the habeas corpus application is sustained because the petitioner is lawfully held under a valid state sentence.
-
62 So. 2d 420·
Fla.·
1952-07-15
·cited 4×
-
The court held that an induction order is not legally 'mailed' if it is not properly addressed, and a registrant's right to reclassification based on pregnancy is preserved if proof is filed before the board properly mails the order.
-
The court held that while the appellant presented a strong humanitarian case, the undisputed facts provided a legal basis for her exclusion under immigration law, and thus, no legal relief could be granted.
-
Federal courts should not ordinarily re-examine questions already adjudicated by state courts and denied certiorari by the Supreme Court, absent unusual circumstances.
-
The court held that a petition for writ of habeas corpus is not available when a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was an adequate and effective remedy, even if unsuccessful.
-
The court held that applicants had not exhausted their state remedies because they failed to follow the proper procedural steps for seeking a writ of habeas corpus in Minnesota courts.
-
184 F.2d 606·
D.C. Cir.·
1950-07-31
·cited 4×
The court held that non-citizens, including enemy aliens convicted by military commissions, cannot prosecute appeals in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.