Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus

7,517 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 5,493 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Herman v. Butterworth
  929 F.2d 623· 11th Cir.· 1991-04-25 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the admission of Exhibit 56, a summary of inadmissible confessions, was not prejudicial to the defendant's case, and therefore, counsel's failure to object did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Tabor v. Armontrout
  930 F.2d 659· 8th Cir.· 1991-04-19 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the habeas corpus petition, affirming the judgment.
• Creel v. Keene
  928 F.2d 707· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-16 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the Texas parole statute, as amended, does not create a constitutionally protected liberty interest in parole release, and therefore, the denial of parole did not violate due process.
• Felk v. Dugger
  577 So. 2d 717· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-04-11 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Felk appeals denial of habeas corpus relief seeking provisional credits under a statute enacted after his crimes. The court affirms the denial but certifies an ex post facto question to the Florida Supreme Court regarding whether applying a restrictive gain-time statute to inmate
• Anthanasios G. Dallis v. Martin
  929 F.2d 587· 10th Cir.· 1991-04-08 ·via Petition For Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the amended penalty statute for the firearm offense was effective upon enactment, and therefore the Parole Commission correctly computed the petitioner's parole eligibility date.
• Griffin v. Davies
  929 F.2d 550· 10th Cir.· 1991-03-29
  The court held that the trial judge's excessive admonitions to a prosecution witness did not violate the petitioner's due process rights because the witness testified and the testimony was not rendered less material or favorable due to the judge's actions.
• Gonzalo Fernos-Lopez v. Eloisa Figarella Lopez
  929 F.2d 20· 1st Cir.· 1991-03-27
  The court held that the petitioner was not 'in custody' when he filed his habeas corpus petition, thus the district court lacked jurisdiction.
• Lynott v. Story
  929 F.2d 228· 6th Cir.· 1991-03-26
  The court held that a parolee's Fifth Amendment rights are not violated unless 'certain non-criminal sanctions' are imposed as a direct result of refusing to testify, and that ineffective assistance of counsel requires showing both deficient performance and prejudice.
• Moore v. Armontrout
  928 F.2d 288· 8th Cir.· 1991-03-20
  The court held that ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel can constitute cause to lift a procedural bar, but in this case, counsel's strategic decision not to raise the rape charge issue was reasonable. The court also found the guilty pleas for rape and tampering were
• Wright v. Crispus C. NIX
  928 F.2d 270· 8th Cir.· 1991-03-18 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice under the Strickland test for ineffective assistance of counsel, as he did not show that the outcome of his trial would have been different with the excluded juror.
• Weekley v. Jones
  927 F.2d 382· 8th Cir.· 1991-03-04
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting an extension for the notice of appeal, but reversed and remanded for further consideration of the jury selection and ineffective assistance of counsel claims.
• Tetzler v. State
  575 So. 2d 318· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-03-01
  Florida appellate court reversed trial court's denial of post-conviction relief motion, holding that ineffective assistance of counsel claims regarding belated appeals must be addressed through Rule 3.850 motions in trial court rather than habeas corpus petitions in appellate cou
• Williams v. A.L. Lockhart
  927 F.2d 374· 8th Cir.· 1991-02-28
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the second habeas petition as an abuse of the writ, because the petitioner had knowledge of and participated in the filing of the first petition.
• Johnson v. Vose
  927 F.2d 10· 1st Cir.· 1991-02-27
  The court held that the defendant was not entitled to a presumption of vindictiveness because the judge's statement about a rejected plea offer, made after closing arguments, did not create a reasonable likelihood of vindictiveness.
• Mills v. Armontrout
  926 F.2d 773· 8th Cir.· 1991-02-27 ·via Petition For Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the district court properly denied the petition for habeas corpus relief, affirming the lower court's decision.
• Cyril Athana Kolocotronis v. Holcomb
  925 F.2d 278· 8th Cir.· 1991-02-15
  The court held that the petitioner sufficiently alleged exhaustion of state remedies as a matter of pleading, and a dismissal without prejudice is a final order for appellate review.
• Earnest v. A.L. Lockhart
  926 F.2d 703· 8th Cir.· 1991-02-14
  The appellate court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas petition, finding the petitioner procedurally barred from federal review.
• Alvarado v. State
  574 So. 2d 274· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-02-12
  Pedro Alvarado appealed the denial of his post-conviction relief motion challenging his convictions and sentences for first degree murder and related offenses. The court affirmed the denial of his ineffective trial counsel claim but reversed on his ineffective appellate counsel c
• Goode v. Armontrout
  925 F.2d 239· 8th Cir.· 1991-02-04
  The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate prejudice from his trial counsel's alleged ineffectiveness, as required by Strickland v. Washington.
• Bianchi v. Blodgett
  925 F.2d 305· 9th Cir.· 1991-01-31 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that a federal habeas corpus petition must challenge the judgment of a single state court, and a petitioner cannot challenge judgments from two different states in a single petition, even if based on an interjurisdictional plea agreement.
• Pletka v. Crispus NIX
  924 F.2d 771· 8th Cir.· 1991-01-29 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that even if counsel was ineffective for failing to object to a jury instruction that omitted malice aforethought for felony murder, the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice under Strickland v. Washington because the outcome of the case would not likely have
• Marsh v. Taylor
  925 F.2d 1131· 9th Cir.· 1991-01-28
  The Parole Commission's erroneous grant of a presumptive parole date was void and could be corrected, as the defendant's sentence was unparolable under the Sentencing Guidelines.
• Rice v. Clarke
  923 F.2d 117· 8th Cir.· 1991-01-14
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, as the prosecution's alleged failures to disclose evidence did not prejudice the defendant.
• Hicks v. Duckworth
  922 F.2d 409· 7th Cir.· 1991-01-10
  A defendant's double jeopardy rights are not violated when the state appeals the dismissal of an habitual offender charge after the defendant has begun serving a sentence on the underlying crime, if the state has a statutory right to appeal.
• McDANIEL v. State OF Ariz.
  921 F.2d 966· 9th Cir.· 1990-12-28 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that modifying a sentence to be consecutive rather than concurrent, when the overall punishment was not increased, does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause. Furthermore, collateral estoppel does not apply to sentencing modifications.
• Willhoite v. Vasquez
  921 F.2d 247· 9th Cir.· 1990-12-27
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding that while the prosecutor's secret deal was objectionable, there was no reasonable probability that its disclosure would have changed the trial's outcome.
• Sammie Clemons v. Armontrout
  921 F.2d 187· 8th Cir.· 1990-12-19 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding that the defendant's claims regarding double jeopardy, improper guilty pleas, and ineffective assistance of counsel were meritless.
• Thomas v. Collins
  919 F.2d 333· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-17
  The court held that the federal habeas petition must be dismissed for failure to exhaust state remedies because the petitioner raised new, combined arguments for the first time before the federal magistrate.
• Grant v. Hoke
  921 F.2d 28· 2d Cir.· 1990-12-14 ·via Application For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the denial of a severance motion did not abridge the petitioner's right to a fair trial under the fourteenth amendment, as the defenses, while antagonistic, were not so mutually exclusive that the jury had to disbelieve one to believe the other.
• Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Cole
  574 So. 2d 160· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-12-13
  HRS appealed an order requiring it to pay attorney's fees for Ronald Cole's representation of the Guardian Ad Litem Program in a child dependency case. The court reversed, holding that HRS has no obligation to pay the fees of counsel for the Guardian Ad Litem Program because HRS
• Aiken v. Blodgett
  921 F.2d 214· 9th Cir.· 1990-12-12 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that new evidence regarding decibel levels did not prove the officers heard the defendant's requests for counsel, and thus did not render the confession involuntary. The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition.
• Chandler v. Barncastle
  919 F.2d 23· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-11 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  A parole violator warrant is invalidly executed if attempted contrary to the Parole Commission's specific instructions, allowing the Commission to withdraw it.
• Thompson v. State
  570 So. 2d 423· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-11-21 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Percy Thompson petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus arguing that delays in his appellate briefing, caused by the public defender's office being overworked, entitled him to immediate release pending appeal. The court denied the petition, finding that the legislature had appropri
• The United States v. Ghassan L. Ammar
  919 F.2d 13· 3d Cir.· 1990-11-19
  The court held that a defendant's claim that a mandatory special parole term was added to his sentence in his absence is a fundamental defect cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, as it violates Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 43(a).
• Tyler v. Armontrout
  917 F.2d 1138· 8th Cir.· 1990-10-31
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition and Rule 60(b) motion, finding that the claims constituted an abuse of the writ because they were deliberately withheld from a prior petition.
• Hardy v. Wigginton
  922 F.2d 294· 6th Cir.· 1990-10-29
  The court held that the petitioner's claim that a child witness must testify in the physical presence of the trier of fact constitutes a 'new rule' that is not retroactively applicable on federal habeas review.
• Rael v. Sullivan
  918 F.2d 874· 10th Cir.· 1990-10-29 ·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the jury instructions on extortion did not violate due process because they accurately reflected New Mexico law regarding the essential elements of the crime.
• Corey v. Dist. Court OF Vt.
  917 F.2d 88· 2d Cir.· 1990-10-22
  The court held that a mistrial declared sua sponte by the trial judge, after the jury had reached a verdict of not guilty, was not supported by manifest necessity, thus barring retrial under the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• Evans v. Muncy
  916 F.2d 163· 4th Cir.· 1990-10-16
  The court held that a federal court cannot grant habeas relief based on a 'new rule' that does not fall under Teague v. Lane exceptions, and that claims based on post-conviction conduct are matters for executive clemency, not federal habeas corpus.
• Fate McMILLER v. A.L. Lockhart
  915 F.2d 368· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-27
  The court held that the petitioner did not receive constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance.
• Wickham v. Denis Dowd
  914 F.2d 1111· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-24
  The court held that the district court announced a new constitutional rule and applied it retroactively, violating the Teague v. Lane precedent.
• Gavin v. Wells
  914 F.2d 97· 6th Cir.· 1990-09-19
  A federal court lacks jurisdiction to consider a habeas corpus petition challenging a conviction for which the sentence has already been fully served, even if that conviction was used to enhance a later sentence.
• Vick v. Navarro
  567 So. 2d 495· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-09-18 ·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  In this habeas corpus petition, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal held that a trial court's contempt order violated due process protections because it simultaneously invoked both civil and criminal contempt findings without affording the defendant the constitutional pro
• COX v. Warden, Fed. Detention Ctr.
  911 F.2d 1111· 5th Cir.· 1990-09-17 ·via 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that claims concerning sentencing errors are properly brought under § 2255, while post-sentencing errors by the Parole Commission or Bureau of Prisons are properly brought under § 2241. The denial of a motion to amend a habeas petition to add a claim for jail-time
• Cephas Larry Stone v. State
  566 So. 2d 581· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-09-06
  Petitioner Stone sought habeas corpus relief claiming ineffective assistance of appellate counsel for failing to appeal the trial court's denial of a motion to sever Count III (malicious punishment/willful torture) from Counts I and II (sexual battery). The court denied the petit
• Smith v. Dugger
  911 F.2d 494· 11th Cir.· 1990-08-22 ·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the writ of habeas corpus after finding counsel's failure to suppress confessions was unreasonable, as prior rulings established prejudice.
• GEE v. State OF Kan.
  912 F.2d 414· 10th Cir.· 1990-08-20
  The court held that a state's participation in extraditing a prisoner from federal custody, even as an intermediary, does not invalidate the extradition if the prisoner is a fugitive from justice.
• Piekarski v. Bogan
  912 F.2d 224· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-20
  The court held that the petitioner is not entitled to immediate parole eligibility based on the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, as amended.
• Davis v. Maynard
  911 F.2d 415· 10th Cir.· 1990-08-17
  The court held that the anti-sympathy instruction created a new rule not applicable on collateral review, but the aggravating circumstance instruction was unconstitutional under existing precedent.
• Coleman v. Jones
  909 F.2d 447· 11th Cir.· 1990-08-17
  A jury instruction that presumes malice from the use of a deadly weapon, while erroneous, was harmless because the defendant was convicted of a capital offense requiring intentional killing, not a lesser offense requiring malice.