Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus

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

• Pesina v. Johnson
  913 F.2d 53· 2d Cir.· 1990-09-14 ·cited 2×
  A federal habeas corpus petition containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims must be dismissed in its entirety, and a petitioner must seek leave to appeal to the highest state court to exhaust remedies.
• Barker v. Estelle
  913 F.2d 1433· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Barker's prosecution did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause because jeopardy did not attach at his juvenile fitness hearing under the amended California statute, and his due process rights were not violated as the right of confrontation does not apply to s
• Judd v. Baer
  911 F.2d 571· 11th Cir.· 1990-09-07 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The failure of the National Appeals Board (NAB) to render a decision within sixty days, as mandated by 18 U.S.C. § 4215(b), does not create an entitlement to habeas relief for the prisoner or parolee awaiting the decision.
• Murray v. Cowley
  913 F.2d 832· 10th Cir.· 1990-09-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant was not similarly situated to other prisoners whose sentences were reduced, and therefore, the refusal to reduce his sentence did not violate equal protection.
• Manning v. Alexander
  912 F.2d 878· 6th Cir.· 1990-08-31 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The Sixth Circuit held that Manning adequately presented his ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim to the Supreme Court of Ohio, thus exhausting his state remedies.
• Jeffries v. Crispus C. NIX
  912 F.2d 982· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-30 ·cited 2×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the trial court properly excluded evidence of the victim's past sexual behavior under the rape shield law, and any error in excluding evidence of delusions was harmless.
• Ostrosky v. State OF Alaska
  913 F.2d 590· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-28 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that prosecuting Ostrosky after a lower court declared the statute unconstitutional, but while that decision was on appeal, did not violate due process, and that Ostrosky waived his right to a jury trial on his mistake of law defense.
• Vince Coleman v. R.E. Honsted
  908 F.2d 906· 11th Cir.· 1990-08-13 ·cited 2×
  The Parole Commission may rely on controverted portions of a presentence investigation report if it finds them accurate, and the Sentencing Reform Act did not mandate release within a specific guideline range.
• Hamblen v. Dugger
  748 F. Supp. 1498· M.D. Fla.· 1990-07-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a constitutional violation regarding cruel and unusual punishment during execution or improper resentencing procedures, and thus denied the petition for habeas corpus and stay of execution.
• Larson v. United States
  907 F.2d 85· 8th Cir.· 1990-07-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review the substantive decisions of the Parole Commission for abuse of discretion, except for violations of the Parole Act or the Constitution.
• Hunter v. Clark
  906 F.2d 302· 7th Cir.· 1990-07-03 ·cited 2×
  The majority holds that a defendant waived his constitutional right to a no-adverse-inference instruction by declining the trial court's offer of severance. The dissenting judge argues this holding contravenes Supreme Court precedent and principles of waiver.
• Alexzene Hamilton v. Collins
  905 F.2d 825· 5th Cir.· 1990-06-25 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the habeas petition because the state court's findings of competency were fairly supported by the record and thus binding. The court denied the stay of execution and affirmed the dismissal.
• Martin v. Kaiser
  907 F.2d 931· 10th Cir.· 1990-06-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of jurisdictional error, improper admission of evidence, limitations on cross-examination, and sentencing issues did not rise to the level of constitutional error required for habeas corpus relief.
• Smith v. Dugger
  758 F. Supp. 688· N.D. Fla.· 1990-06-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the state's argument that a prior finding of no prejudice under Strickland v. Washington automatically renders a Hitchcock error harmless is incorrect, as the tactical decisions were made under the law as it existed at the time, and the subsequent change in la
• Ford v. A.L. Lockhart
  904 F.2d 458· 8th Cir.· 1990-06-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant received effective assistance of counsel and his guilty plea was voluntary, knowing, and intelligent.
• Sandsbury LEE v. Dugger
  902 F.2d 822· 11th Cir.· 1990-06-04 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. A single intermediate appellate court decision construing a statute is insufficient to establish clarity for qualified immunity purpos
• Wilton Howell v. W.R. Barker
  904 F.2d 889· 4th Cir.· 1990-05-24 ·cited 2×
  A defendant seeking due process relief for preindictment delay must prove actual prejudice, after which the court balances the prejudice against the government's justification for the delay.
• Richter v. Fairbanks
  903 F.2d 1202· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-23 ·cited 2×
• Pens v. Kit Bail
  902 F.2d 1464· 9th Cir.· 1990-05-16 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that using statements made by a defendant during court-ordered, confidential therapy to impose an exceptional sentence violates the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
• Hafley v. Sowders
  902 F.2d 480· 6th Cir.· 1990-05-15 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that one claim was exhausted and meritorious, while the remaining six ineffective assistance of counsel claims were unexhausted. The court affirmed dismissal of unexhausted claims and dismissal of the exhausted claim on its merits.
• Harriman v. Lynn
  901 F.2d 64· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-15 ·cited 2×·via Application For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Arizona v. Roberson, which prohibited further interrogation after a suspect invokes the right to counsel, announced a "new rule" and therefore does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review where the conviction was f
• Smith v. Honorable Richard J. Cadagin
  902 F.2d 553· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the prosecutor's cross-examination about the defendant's characterization of the incident did not violate Doyle v. Ohio because the defendant had made post-arrest statements about the event, and the questioning sought an explanation for an arguably inconsisten
• Henderson v. Smith
  903 F.2d 534· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a defendant in state court can validly waive their Sixth Amendment right to conflict-free counsel without an on-the-record inquiry, provided the waiver is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.
• Capps v. Collins
  900 F.2d 58· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-04 ·cited 2×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the exclusion of irrelevant evidence did not violate the right to confrontation, and counsel was not ineffective for failing to introduce inadmissible evidence.
• Epps v. State of Iowa
  901 F.2d 1481· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-02 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, finding no constitutional violation regarding the change of venue and no ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Braley v. Shillinger
  902 F.2d 20· 10th Cir.· 1990-04-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the state court's refusal to permit inquiry into alleged improper jury influence did not infringe the Sixth Amendment right to a fair jury, and the state court's finding of no bias was conclusive.
• Winford Stokes v. Armontrout
  901 F.2d 1460· 8th Cir.· 1990-04-24 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
• Collins v. State
  559 So. 2d 1276· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-04-18 ·cited 2×
  Eddie Collins sought habeas corpus relief as a pretrial detainee challenging the adequacy of his court-appointed counsel. The Florida appellate court dismissed his appeal, holding that habeas corpus is not the proper remedy for challenging counsel's representation and that such c
• Hunt v. Vasquez
  899 F.2d 878· 9th Cir.· 1990-04-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in ordering the state to apply superseded law to the reinstated appeal, as habeas corpus remedies federal rights, not state law regimes.
• Adcox v. O'Brien
  899 F.2d 735· 8th Cir.· 1990-03-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court must reconsider the appellant's motions to suppress evidence and confession, as a favorable ruling might have altered the appellant's decision to plead guilty.
• Brown v. Armontrout
  898 F.2d 84· 8th Cir.· 1990-03-16 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the appellant's claims lacked merit, affirming the district court's denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Lawrence v. Edilberto Pestana
  560 So. 2d 248· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-03-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a complaint sworn before a magistrate satisfies the statutory requirement for an authenticated affidavit in extradition demands, and the asylum state cannot re-examine the demanding state's probable cause determination.
• McCartney v. Vitek
  902 F.2d 616· 8th Cir.· 1990-02-07 ·cited 2×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a federal court may dismiss a habeas petition for failure to exhaust state remedies, even before the state has responded, if the state indicates it will not waive the exhaustion requirement.
• Bateson v. Dugger
  556 So. 2d 498· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-02-06 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The denial of the petition for writ of habeas corpus is affirmed because the appellant failed to state a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Barham v. Powell
  895 F.2d 19· 1st Cir.· 1990-01-31 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's request for a continuance, and therefore, the defendant was not denied his Sixth Amendment right to self-representation.
• Rondal R. Francis v. R.H. Rison
  894 F.2d 353· 9th Cir.· 1990-01-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the government waived the prisoner's procedural default by failing to assert it, and therefore the district court should have reached the merits of the habeas claims.
• Williams-Bey v. Trickey
  894 F.2d 314· 8th Cir.· 1990-01-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a state prisoner's claim regarding a state post-conviction court's failure to make findings of fact is not cognizable in a federal habeas corpus petition. The court also held that defense counsel's decision not to cross-examine the victim about a prior alleged
• Norwood v. Brennan
  891 F.2d 179· 7th Cir.· 1989-12-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the 1987 amendment to § 235(b)(3) of the Sentencing Reform Act did not violate the ex post facto clause and properly applied to the petitioner's parole determination.
• Grassia v. Scully
  892 F.2d 16· 2d Cir.· 1989-12-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a district court is not required to hear live testimony from all witnesses heard by a magistrate to reject the magistrate's recommendation, provided the district court conducts its own evidentiary hearing and makes a de novo determination.
• C.S. v. Brown
  553 So. 2d 317· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-12-04 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  C.S., a juvenile detained for 21 days, challenged his continued detention after the state filed an information charging him as an adult. The court held that a juvenile must be brought before a criminal court judge within 24 hours of an information filing, and that continued deten
• Russell v. Lane
  890 F.2d 947· 7th Cir.· 1989-11-29 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  A judge's recusal does not automatically invalidate prior rulings, but a party may seek to vacate those rulings under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6) if the recusal ground existed at the time of the rulings.
• Arce v. Smith
  889 F.2d 1271· 2d Cir.· 1989-11-20 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the petitioner procedurally defaulted his claims by failing to raise them on direct appeal or in a timely manner, and he failed to show cause to excuse the default, thus precluding review of the merits.
• In the Interest of A.M.R. v. Coler
  555 So. 2d 1248· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-11-15 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  A juvenile committed to HRS petitioned for a writ of mandamus to compel HRS to comply with Florida law requiring placement in a commitment program within five days of commitment, rather than remaining in detention indefinitely. The appellate court granted the petition, holding th
• In the Interest of D.W. v. Coler
  555 So. 2d 1246· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-11-15 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  A juvenile committed to HRS sought a writ of mandamus to compel HRS to comply with Florida's statutory requirement to place committed juveniles in a commitment program within five days of commitment, rather than keeping them in detention. The court granted the petition, holding t
• United States v. DeLUCA
  889 F.2d 503· 3d Cir.· 1989-11-15 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the district court erred in revoking the special parole term but did not err in failing to vacate the guilty plea.
• Avila v. Rivkind
  724 F. Supp. 945· S.D. Fla.· 1989-11-08 ·cited 2×
  The Attorney General has the ultimate authority to exclude an alien based on national security concerns, even if preliminary procedures suggested otherwise, and this decision is largely unreviewable by courts.
• Tino Fiumara v. O'Brien
  889 F.2d 254· 10th Cir.· 1989-11-06 ·cited 2×
  The Parole Commission did not abuse its discretion in using unconvicted murders to increase the appellant's offense severity rating, as there was sufficient evidence to establish a nexus between the murders and his racketeering and extortion offenses.
• Weaver v. Foltz
  888 F.2d 1097· 6th Cir.· 1989-11-02 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the District Court erred in dismissing a mixed habeas corpus petition without considering Granberry v. Greer, which allows consideration of exhausted issues in such petitions.
• Peters v. Egnor
  888 F.2d 713· 10th Cir.· 1989-11-02 ·cited 2×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the magistrate's finding of probable cause for extradition on charges of theft by deception and forgery, and that the dual criminality requirement was satisfied.
• Reutter v. Solem
  888 F.2d 578· 8th Cir.· 1989-11-02 ·cited 2×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the prosecution's failure to disclose a key witness's pending sentence commutation hearing, which could have been used for impeachment, constituted a Brady violation because the undisclosed evidence was material to the outcome of the trial.