Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus

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

• Bowles v. State
  979 So. 2d 182· Fla.· 2008-02-14 ·cited 30×
  Gary Ray Bowles appeals the denial of his Rule 3.851 postconviction motion and petitions for habeas corpus following his death sentence for murder. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the postconviction court's rejection of all claims, finding no ineffective assistance of counsel,
• Mathis v. Fla. Parole Comm'n
  944 So. 2d 1182· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-12-15 ·cited 30×
  Mathis challenged the revocation of his parole following a trespass conviction, seeking certiorari review of a habeas corpus denial. The court held that parole revocation requires a hearing officer's explicit factual finding that violations were willful, and because the record wa
• Raleigh v. State
  932 So. 2d 1054· Fla.· 2006-06-01 ·cited 30×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Bobby Raleigh, convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death, appeals the denial of his rule 3.851 motion for postconviction relief and petitions for a writ of habeas corpus. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the trial court's denial of all postconviction
• Henry v. State
  937 So. 2d 563· Fla.· 2006-05-25 ·cited 30×
  Robert Henry appeals the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion for relief and petitions for a writ of habeas corpus in this capital murder case. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the denial of postconviction relief, finding no ineffective assistance of counsel at trial o
• Chadwick D. Banks v. State
  842 So. 2d 788· Fla.· 2003-03-20 ·cited 30×
  Chadwick Banks, a death row inmate, appealed the trial court's denial of his Rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief and filed a habeas corpus petition, challenging his death sentence on grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel and constitutional defects in Florida's deat
• Shere v. Moore
  830 So. 2d 56· Fla.· 2002-09-12 ·cited 30×
  Richard Earl Shere, sentenced to death for first-degree murder, petitions for habeas corpus relief, claiming his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise proportionality arguments based on his codefendant's life sentence for second-degree murder. The Florida Supreme
• Kight v. State
  784 So. 2d 396· Fla.· 2001-01-18 ·cited 30×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Charles Michael Kight, a death row inmate, appealed the trial court's denial of his second Rule 3.850 postconviction motion based on newly discovered evidence of his codefendant Gary Hutto's confession to the murder. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial, holding that the
• Genorval Slay v. Singletary
  676 So. 2d 456· Fla. 1st DCA· 1996-05-28 ·cited 30×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal, First District, granted rehearing en banc to address whether a sentencing order's award of "credit for all time previously served" was sufficient to grant credit for earned gain-time under State v. Green. The court ultimately vacated the lowe
• Hickman v. State
  581 So. 2d 942· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-06-12 ·cited 30×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  William Hickman appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief, claiming he requested an appeal from his 1985 conviction but his trial attorney failed to file it. The court affirms the denial as to most issues barred by the two-year limitations period and succ
• Thomas v. R.D. Brewer
  923 F.2d 1361· 9th Cir.· 1991-01-17 ·cited 30×
  A prisoner is entitled to credit for time that should have been used for a diagnostic study, even if the marshal failed to act promptly.
• Richmond v. Lewis
  948 F.2d 1473· 9th Cir.· 1990-12-26 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the panel erred in its harmless error analysis by incorrectly assuming Arizona is not a weighing state, which requires reevaluation when an invalid aggravating factor is present.
• United States ex rel. Nathaniel Simmons v. Gramley
  915 F.2d 1128· 7th Cir.· 1990-10-09 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to prove ineffective assistance of counsel, either at trial or during post-conviction proceedings, and that the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing.
• Cary Michael Lambrix v. State
  559 So. 2d 1137· Fla.· 1990-04-26 ·cited 30×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  Cary Michael Lambrix, a death row inmate, appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition, claiming his collateral counsel was ineffective for failing to raise a juror misconduct claim in his prior postconviction motion. The Florida Supreme Court rejected the claim, finding the
• Buxton v. Lynaugh
  879 F.2d 140· 5th Cir.· 1989-07-21 ·cited 30×
  The state court's determination of a factual issue based solely on conflicting affidavits, without an evidentiary hearing, was not adequate to afford a full and fair hearing as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(2).
• Ritter v. Thigpen
  828 F.2d 662· 11th Cir.· 1987-08-27 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were barred by the abuse of the writ doctrine, and therefore, a certificate of probable cause and a stay of execution were denied.
• Bryan v. Warden, Ind. State Reformatory
  820 F.2d 217· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-15 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the voluntariness of a Miranda waiver is a factual determination entitled to deference under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), and that the appellant waived his due process claim by failing to raise it on rehearing.
• Sinclair v. Louie L. Wainwright and Jim Smith
  814 F.2d 1516· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-20 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that a magistrate had the authority to grant summary judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and that the petitioner failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel on most grounds. However, the court remanded for a determination of a witness's competency to testif
• Thaddeus Michael Lockhart v. O.L. McCOTTER
  782 F.2d 1275· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-18 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the defendant was not deprived of effective assistance of counsel at trial, and although appellate counsel's performance was deficient, the defendant suffered no prejudice because the appellate issues raised were ultimately rejected.
• Garza v. J.D. Henderson
  779 F.2d 390· 7th Cir.· 1985-12-13 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the defendants in the civil rights action were not collaterally estopped from relitigating the issue of whether the plaintiff received an opportunity for an in-person hearing, and that even if a due process violation occurred, the plaintiff could not establish
• Flittie v. Solem
  775 F.2d 933· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-14 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
• Hamilton v. O.L. McCOTTER
  772 F.2d 171· 5th Cir.· 1985-10-03 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the claim of a forged indictment was not procedurally barred and remanded for further consideration, while affirming the dismissal of other claims as abuse of the writ.
• Inglese v. United States Parole Comm'n
  768 F.2d 932· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-26 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the parole guidelines, as applied, did not violate the ex post facto clause because they retained discretion and allowed for individualized consideration.
• Dalton Prejean v. Maggio
  765 F.2d 482· 5th Cir.· 1985-07-15 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
• Francois v. Louie L. Wainwright
  470 So. 2d 685· Fla.· 1985-05-22 ·cited 30×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a successive habeas corpus petition raising claims previously presented and denied is not cognizable, and even if considered, the claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel failed to meet the Strickland standard.
• Briley v. Bass
  750 F.2d 1238· 4th Cir.· 1984-12-28 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the jury instructions, when viewed in their entirety, adequately informed the jury of its discretion to recommend life imprisonment and consider mitigating circumstances, and that the exclusion of prospective jurors with death penalty scruples was not an abuse
• Ivie Clay v. Dir., Juv. Div., Dep't OF Corr.
  749 F.2d 427· 7th Cir.· 1984-11-16 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a lawyer's decision not to appeal is not automatically ineffective assistance of counsel, especially when an appeal would be futile or incur significant costs.
• Barham v. United States
  724 F.2d 1529· 11th Cir.· 1984-02-16 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the simultaneous representation of a defendant and a government witness by the same attorney does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel unless an actual conflict of interest adversely affected the attorney's performance.
• Urquhart v. A.L. Lockhart
  726 F.2d 1316· 8th Cir.· 1984-02-10 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing, affirming the judgment.
• Muench v. Israel
  715 F.2d 1124· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-15 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The dissenting judge would grant the writs, finding the state's justifications for excluding psychiatric testimony on mens rea unpersuasive.
• Gray v. Eddie Lucas & the State of Miss.
  710 F.2d 1048· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-15 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the petitioner's claims, including present insanity, improper jury instructions, prosecutorial misconduct, proportionality review, vague aggravating factors, cruel and unusual punishment, and ineffective assistance of counsel, did not warrant federal habeas co
• Nash v. Israel
  707 F.2d 298· 7th Cir.· 1983-05-19 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a guilty plea is invalid if the trial court fails to establish on the record that the defendant understood the elements of the charge, particularly when the defendant explicitly states confusion.
• Len C. Scott v. Louie L. Wainwright
  698 F.2d 427· 11th Cir.· 1983-02-14 ·cited 30×
  A guilty plea is not knowing and voluntary if the defendant did not receive reasonably effective assistance of counsel in deciding to plead guilty.
• Ross v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  694 F.2d 1008· 5th Cir.· 1983-01-03 ·cited 30×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the denial of the writ of habeas corpus was proper because the appellant's claims of constitutional error, including denial of compulsory process and ineffective assistance of counsel, lacked merit.
• French v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  692 F.2d 1021· 5th Cir.· 1982-12-06 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of habeas corpus relief, holding that the petitioner's life sentence was not supported by sufficient evidence due to the State's failure to prove the date of the second prior felony, and that double jeopardy bars a second enhancement
• Emmett Hickerson v. Maggio
  691 F.2d 792· 5th Cir.· 1982-11-18 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  A defendant has a due process right to the exercise of the sentencer's discretion, and a claim that this discretion was not exercised warrants an evidentiary hearing if not conclusively refuted by the record.
• Williams v. Holbrook
  691 F.2d 3· 1st Cir.· 1982-09-23 ·cited 30×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the petitioner had sufficiently presented her sixth amendment claims to the state courts, satisfying the exhaustion requirement, and that her escape did not constitute an abuse of the writ warranting dismissal.
• United States ex rel. Otis Williams & A. D. Clark v. Franzen
  687 F.2d 944· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-20 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that a conflict of interest adversely affecting a lawyer's performance warrants habeas relief, even if the state court applied an improper prejudice standard or if a petitioner arguably waived the claim on appeal.
• Fornash v. Marshall
  686 F.2d 1179· 6th Cir.· 1982-08-16 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate actual prejudice from the jury instructions and did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Johnson v. Williford
  682 F.2d 868· 9th Cir.· 1982-07-30 ·cited 30×
  The government is estopped from enforcing the non-parolability provision of 21 U.S.C. § 848 due to its repeated administrative errors, and returning the petitioner to prison would violate due process.
• United States v. Franzen
  669 F.2d 433· 7th Cir.· 1982-01-12 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  Federal courts cannot entertain state law claims in habeas corpus proceedings, as the habeas corpus statutes are limited to violations of federal law. Pendent jurisdiction does not extend to state law claims in this context.
• Iuteri v. Nardoza
  662 F.2d 159· 2d Cir.· 1981-10-19 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in granting bail pending a decision on a habeas corpus petition, as the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial claims or extraordinary circumstances.
• Powell v. Wyrick
  657 F.2d 222· 8th Cir.· 1981-08-26 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that a petitioner is not required to pursue a discretionary state remedy under Mo.R.Civ.P. 84.08 if such pursuit would be futile.
• Priore v. Nelson
  626 F.2d 211· 2d Cir.· 1980-06-11 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the United States Parole Commission's guidelines were lawfully promulgated and applied, did not violate statutory intent or constitutional prohibitions, and that the prisoner's claim regarding mandatory release was premature.
• Moore v. Nelson
  611 F.2d 434· 2d Cir.· 1979-12-05 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The United States Parole Commission's guidelines may be applied to federal prisoners sentenced under 18 U.S.C. § 4205(b)(2), and these guidelines may consider offense severity and do not require special emphasis on rehabilitation for such prisoners.
• Goode v. Carson Markley
  603 F.2d 973· D.C. Cir.· 1979-07-05 ·cited 30×
  The court held that consecutive sentences imposed by the District of Columbia are not treated as imposed by a separate sovereign, allowing aggregation for parole eligibility determination.
• Harrison v. State OF Ind.
  597 F.2d 115· 7th Cir.· 1979-05-02 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  A federal court retains jurisdiction over a habeas corpus petition even if the petitioner is released from custody before the proceedings conclude, provided jurisdiction attached at the time of filing, and the petition is not moot if collateral consequences of the challenged conv
• Leigh Detko/Roberts v. Honorable Graham W. Stikelether
  370 So. 2d 383· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-03-07 ·cited 30×
  The court reversed the trial court's assumption of jurisdiction over a child custody modification petition, holding that Alabama, not Florida, was the proper forum under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA). The father's deliberate forum-shopping by removing the chi
• Edmond Jackson v. Fogg
  589 F.2d 108· 2d Cir.· 1978-12-19 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the admission of identification testimony from three eyewitnesses, tainted by suggestive police procedures, constituted a denial of due process.
• Gerrold Duane Davis v. Louie L. Wainwright
  547 F.2d 261· 5th Cir.· 1977-02-18 ·cited 30×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that a violation of a state speedy trial rule, even if counsel failed to raise it, is not a constitutional violation reviewable by federal habeas corpus. A guilty plea is voluntary if the defendant affirms it is knowing and voluntary, even if the court doesn't list
• Craig v. Warden Sam P. Garrison
  549 F.2d 306· 4th Cir.· 1977-02-07 ·cited 30×·via Application For Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  When a pro se litigant's notice of appeal is filed within the extension period, the court must advise the litigant of the requirements for excusable neglect before deeming it untimely.