7,512 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 district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief because it improperly applied the standard of review and disregarded the law of the case doctrine.
-
A state's failure to provide good-time credits for pretrial detention, while allowing them for sentenced prisoners, does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
The court held that the state's significant delay in adjudicating the petitioner's direct criminal appeal violates his due process rights and excuses him from the requirement to exhaust state remedies before seeking federal habeas corpus relief.
-
The court vacated the district court's temporary stay of execution, finding the petitioner's claims procedurally defaulted and barred by doctrines concerning successive petitions and new rules.
-
942 F.2d 468·
8th Cir.·
1991-08-08
·cited 2×
The court held that while the conviction is affirmed, the sentence as a habitual offender must be reversed and remanded because the trial court may have unconstitutionally failed to hold a hearing before transferring the juvenile Girtman to adult court.
-
The court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas relief but remanded to allow the petitioner to amend his petition to include a new claim regarding ineffective assistance of counsel for misadvice on parole eligibility.
-
940 F.2d 324·
8th Cir.·
1991-07-31
·cited 2×
The court held that the petitioner failed to show actual innocence to excuse the abuse of the writ in filing a successive habeas petition.
-
The court held that because the prior conviction was not constitutionally infirm, the petitioner's claim that he was forced to testify due to a tainted conviction is meritless, and the petition is affirmed as successive.
-
The court affirmed the trial court's denial of habeas corpus relief because the appellant's motion for post-conviction relief challenging ineffective assistance of counsel was filed more than three years after the statutory deadline under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.
-
The admission of a nontestifying codefendant's confession was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt, and therefore, habeas corpus relief is denied.
-
The court held that the appellant's sentence enhancement for firearm use was consistent with California law and did not violate due process, and that California law permits gun use findings to attach to all counts arising from a single criminal transaction where a firearm was per
-
582 So. 2d 93·
Fla. 1st DCA·
1991-06-26
·cited 2×
Robert Avera, an inmate, challenged the Department of Corrections' revocation of 293 days of gain time following his 1981 escape. The court reversed the summary denial of his habeas corpus petition, holding that under Florida law, only gain time earned prior to an escape can be f
-
A fifteen-year sentence for uttering a forged check, imposed under a habitual offender statute, does not violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment when compared to Supreme Court precedent.
-
The court held that the petitioner did not present a substantial legal question regarding actual innocence of a death sentence to warrant further review.
-
935 F.2d 790·
6th Cir.·
1991-06-10
·cited 2×
The court held that a federal court must remand for an evidentiary hearing to determine if a state prisoner was aware of the maximum possible sentence when entering a guilty plea, even if the state court found substantial compliance with its rules.
-
935 F.2d 480·
2d Cir.·
1991-06-05
·cited 2×
The court held that the prosecutor's cross-examination of a defense witness, which led the witness to invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege, did not violate the defendant's due process or Sixth Amendment rights.
-
934 F.2d 972·
8th Cir.·
1991-06-04
·cited 2×
The court held that a federal habeas corpus petitioner must demonstrate cause and prejudice for a procedural default, and that claims of ineffective assistance of counsel not presented to state courts cannot establish cause.
-
579 So. 2d 918·
Fla. 1st DCA·
1991-06-03
·cited 2×
-
The court held that the admission of hearsay testimony violated the petitioner's Sixth Amendment confrontation clause rights because the prosecution failed to demonstrate the witness's unavailability with a good-faith effort and the hearsay lacked sufficient indicia of reliabilit
-
934 F.2d 254·
10th Cir.·
1991-05-24
·cited 2×
The Parole Commission has the statutory authority to issue a second parole violator warrant based on a new conviction, even if a prior warrant was issued for the same underlying conduct but resulted in conditional reinstatement due to insufficient evidence.
-
580 So. 2d 295·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1991-05-23
·cited 2×
The court analyzes the complex and unclear legal landscape surrounding the relationship between "greater" offenses like felony murder and weapon/firearm offenses, and their respective "lesser" predicate offenses, particularly concerning double jeopardy implications.
-
932 F.2d 619·
7th Cir.·
1991-05-09
·cited 2×
A habeas claim should not be dismissed for failure to exhaust state remedies if a post-conviction petition would be untimely under Illinois law, unless Illinois precedent indicates the petitioner could demonstrate a lack of culpable negligence.
-
The court held that the confession was not involuntary and affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.
-
578 So. 2d 862·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1991-05-02
·cited 2×
The court held that a juvenile detained beyond statutory limits, even if transferred to home detention, is entitled to release.
-
932 F.2d 131·
2d Cir.·
1991-04-30
·cited 2×
The court held that a witness's invocation of the Fifth Amendment privilege does not violate the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause if the defendant had a prior ample opportunity to cross-examine the witness and the witness's subsequent recantation is deemed untrustworthy.
-
The New Mexico sentencing statute authorizing good time credit only for post-sentencing time served in state prison, but not pre-sentencing time in county jail, does not violate the Equal Protection or Due Process Clauses.
-
929 F.2d 1294·
8th Cir.·
1991-04-09
·cited 2×
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, affirming the denial of relief on all claims.
-
A civil forfeiture proceeding is a collateral consequence of a guilty plea and does not need to be included in a plea agreement for the plea to be considered knowing and voluntary.
-
The court held that the jury's verdict for the defendant on all counts was supported by sufficient evidence and proper jury instructions, affirming the district court's judgment.
-
928 F.2d 548·
2d Cir.·
1991-03-18
·cited 2×
The court held that the petitioner made a sufficient showing to be entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his claim of an actual conflict of interest due to his trial counsel's potential expectation of fees as executor.
-
The Good Time Credits Act of 1986 (GTCA) did not impliedly repeal the prior statute requiring parole violators to forfeit street time credit.
-
The court held that the trial counsel's actions did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel, and the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to testify.
-
927 F.2d 409·
8th Cir.·
1991-03-06
·cited 2×
The court held that a petitioner's pro se status and educational background are insufficient cause for failing to pursue state-court remedies, thus applying the Wainwright cause and prejudice standard to procedural defaults.
-
The court held that the appeal would be held in abeyance pending a determination by the Missouri Court of Appeals on whether a state remedy is available to the petitioner.
-
The court held that the defendant's claim was not procedurally barred because the state court's dismissal was not a clear and express statement of reliance on a procedural default, and the state failed to show particularized prejudice from the delay.
-
Petitioner Stephenson sought habeas corpus relief, arguing he was unlawfully held without probable cause. The Florida appellate court granted the writ, finding that hearsay testimony from witnesses regarding victims' statements was insufficient to establish probable cause at a pr
-
925 F.2d 1097·
8th Cir.·
1991-02-12
·cited 2×
The court held that a petitioner must be in custody at the time of filing a habeas corpus petition, and if the sentence has expired, the petition must be filed before expiration, which requires payment of the filing fee or an order granting leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
-
925 F.2d 1095·
8th Cir.·
1991-02-11
·cited 2×
The court held that the interpretation of state jail time crediting statutes is a matter of state concern, not a proper function of federal habeas corpus jurisdiction.
-
Robert Disinger, a criminal defendant convicted of sexual battery and indecent assault, petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus claiming his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise a Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause violation on direct appeal. The court granted
-
580 So. 2d 161·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1991-01-23
·cited 2×
Jackson sought habeas corpus relief after her cocaine trafficking conviction was affirmed on appeal, arguing her appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise a Williams rule evidence issue that her codefendant's counsel successfully raised on appeal. The court granted t
-
The court held that the district court properly denied the habeas corpus petition, affirming the denial of relief on all grounds.
-
575 So. 2d 220·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1991-01-15
·cited 2×
-
The majority's conclusion that the New Mexico procedural bar rule is not adequate for speedy trial claims is incorrect because it misinterprets state case law and presumes state courts are not faithful to their rules.
-
920 F.2d 454·
7th Cir.·
1990-12-13
·cited 2×
The court held that the jury instruction creating a permissive presumption of great bodily harm based on the victim's physical disability, specifically his height, did not violate due process because there was a rational connection between the victim's height and the increased pr
-
921 F.2d 177·
8th Cir.·
1990-12-12
·cited 2×
The court held that the district court erred by affirming the agency's exclusion order on grounds not relied upon by the agency, and that the appellant deserves a hearing on her claim that her marriage was void under Philippine law.
-
921 F.2d 260·
10th Cir.·
1990-12-10
·cited 2×
The court held that defense counsel's strategy of pursuing jury nullification instead of an entrapment defense, despite evidence supporting it, constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, and the new evidence presented satisfied the prejudice prong for habeas relief.
-
917 F.2d 869·
5th Cir.·
1990-11-06
·cited 2×
A habeas petition is not successive under Rule 9(b) if changed circumstances or new legal grounds, not previously considered on the merits, alter the case's landscape.
-
916 F.2d 291·
5th Cir.·
1990-11-05
·cited 2×
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition, as the appellant's claims were either moot, not cognizable in habeas, or based on a misinterpretation of statutory amendments.
-
917 F.2d 670·
1st Cir.·
1990-10-31
·cited 2×
The court held that the refusal of a lesser included offense instruction in a non-capital state case does not violate federal due process unless it results in a fundamental miscarriage of justice.
-
A sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole cannot be constitutionally imposed on a defendant who pleads guilty, even if they agree to such a sentence in a plea bargain, as the statute requires jury findings for such sentences.