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
-
The court held that the petitioner is not entitled to habeas corpus relief because his claims regarding competency, prosecutorial misconduct, insufficient evidence, trial court bias, and jury selection lack merit or are unexhausted.
-
The court held that while the trial court's restriction on cross-examination regarding prior burglaries was likely harmless error, a remand is necessary to determine if the state failed to disclose an understanding or agreement with a key witness regarding prior crimes, which cou
-
The court held that an incomplete trial transcript did not deny a meaningful appeal and that the petitioner received effective assistance of counsel at trial and on appeal.
-
The Louisiana Supreme Court's reliance on prejudicial, non-record information in reviewing a death sentence violates due process. Such reliance, especially when the court performs both reviewing and imposing functions, renders the appellate review constitutionally infirm.
-
744 F.2d 1323·
8th Cir.·
1984-09-19
·cited 28×
Defense counsel's threats to withdraw, inform the court of intended perjury, and testify against the client deprived the defendant of due process and effective assistance of counsel.
-
456 So. 2d 466·
Fla.·
1984-09-17
·cited 28×
The Florida Supreme Court denied James DuPree Henry's various petitions for post-conviction relief and habeas corpus, and granted the state's motion to vacate a stay of execution in a capital murder case. The court rejected Henry's claims of racial bias in sentencing, alleged pro
-
456 So. 2d 888·
Fla.·
1984-09-11
·cited 28×
The dissenting justice argued that the death penalty was improper and disproportionate given the mitigating circumstances and a questionable aggravating factor, and that a stay and remand were warranted for an evidentiary hearing on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.
-
718 F.2d 1273·
4th Cir.·
1983-10-05
·cited 28×
The court should grant the writ of habeas corpus because the conviction was obtained through unconstitutional means.
-
The court held that issues not presented to the district court cannot be considered on appeal, even if previously noted by an amicus brief.
-
The court held that the district court properly denied habeas corpus relief without an evidentiary hearing, as the record sufficiently demonstrated the voluntariness of the guilty plea and the adequacy of counsel.
-
711 F.2d 63·
6th Cir.·
1983-07-08
·cited 28×
The court held that under the amended Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure 4(a), a late notice of appeal cannot serve as a substitute for a timely motion for an extension of time based on excusable neglect.
-
706 F.2d 93·
2d Cir.·
1983-04-22
·cited 28×
The court held that an alien's persistent evasion of immigration laws constitutes 'special circumstances' making an award of attorneys' fees under the EAJA unjust, even if the government's position on a specific detention issue was not substantially justified.
-
A district court may summarily dismiss a habeas petition without first resolving exhaustion if the petition is facially without merit as a matter of law.
-
693 F.2d 642·
7th Cir.·
1982-11-17
·cited 28×
The court held that a hearing should not be held to determine if the petitioner can show cause and prejudice for failing to make an adequate offer of proof.
-
421 So. 2d 1385·
Fla.·
1982-10-07
·cited 28×
Jackson, a death row inmate, petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus claiming his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise four legal errors on direct appeal. The Florida Supreme Court found no substantial deficiency in appellate representation and denied the petitio
-
The court held that a federal habeas petition containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims must be dismissed in its entirety, requiring the petitioner to re-file with only exhausted claims or to exhaust the remaining claims.
-
The court held that the trial court's refusal to give a voluntary manslaughter instruction was not a due process violation because there was insufficient evidence to support such a charge, and the jury's question about involuntary manslaughter was adequately answered by directing
-
673 F.2d 1031·
9th Cir.·
1982-02-25
·cited 28×
The court held that the state prisoner was not barred from federal habeas relief because the state courts denied his self-representation claim on the merits, not on a procedural default, and that the right to self-representation existed at the time of his trial, with his conduct
-
The court held that the district court properly denied the habeas corpus petitions, finding no constitutional violations regarding witness interference or evidentiary rulings that fatally infected the trial.
-
653 F.2d 202·
5th Cir.·
1981-08-10
·cited 28×
A state prisoner's claim of illegal sentencing under a new penal code, absent prejudice, does not raise a federal constitutional issue cognizable in habeas corpus.
-
640 F.2d 1·
2d Cir.·
1981-01-23
·cited 28×
The court held that a federal habeas corpus claim is barred by procedural default if the petitioner failed to object to a jury instruction at trial and on appeal, absent a showing of cause and prejudice.
-
632 F.2d 531·
5th Cir.·
1980-12-10
·cited 28×
The court held that the government's deliberate concealment of a material eyewitness, who later testified in a manner exculpating the petitioner, constituted a deprivation of due process that was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
633 F.2d 473·
6th Cir.·
1980-10-22
·cited 28×
The court held that the state breached the plea agreement by failing to ensure a promised psychiatric evaluation, and the defendant did not waive his right to it.
-
The court held that the district court erred in applying Rule 9(a) as a strict statute of limitations, rather than as an invocation of the equitable doctrine of laches.
-
The court held that a federal court is not required to grant a new evidentiary hearing in a habeas corpus case solely because the petitioner lacked counsel in the state court proceeding, and that a defendant is not entitled to appellate review unless they knowingly and intelligen
-
The court held that the denial of a defendant's constitutional right to self-representation is automatically prejudicial and does not require a showing of specific harm.
-
The court granted a rehearing en banc, indicating a potential shift in precedent regarding the application of the Eighth Amendment to habitual offender statutes.
-
A federal district court may dismiss a habeas corpus petition without examining the state court transcript if the petition, liberally construed, fails to allege facts indicating a constitutional violation.
-
571 F.2d 1263·
4th Cir.·
1978-02-14
·cited 28×
The dissenting judge believes the majority incorrectly interpreted prior case law regarding the certainty required from a sentencing judge's certificate and improperly directed the North Carolina court to pass on the validity of Virginia convictions.
-
The court held that a federal court should not grant habeas corpus relief on Fourth Amendment claims if the state provided an opportunity for full and fair litigation of those claims, even if the state court made an error.
-
555 F.2d 599·
6th Cir.·
1977-05-31
·cited 28×
The prosecutor's cross-examination of the appellant regarding his post-arrest silence violated his constitutional rights.
-
551 F.2d 180·
7th Cir.·
1977-03-17
·cited 28×
The court held that the failure to inform a defendant of a mandatory parole term at the time of a guilty plea, when the plea was based on a specific sentence agreement, creates a defect of constitutional dimensions violating the Due Process Clause.
-
546 F.2d 177·
5th Cir.·
1977-01-31
·cited 28×
The court held that the state competency hearing was inadequate because it failed to address the correct legal standard and confused issues of criminal responsibility with competency to stand trial.
-
-
The court held that Stone v. Powell bars relitigation of Fourth Amendment claims in a § 2255 Tucker proceeding, and that the defendant's double jeopardy claim lacked merit.
-
541 F.2d 447·
4th Cir.·
1976-09-13
·cited 28×
The court held that the prosecutor's concealment of favorable treatment offered to a key accuser constitutes a denial of due process, requiring a new trial.
-
507 F.2d 685·
5th Cir.·
1975-02-03
·cited 28×
The court held that the petitioner's failure to challenge jury composition and public trial restrictions constituted a deliberate bypass of state remedies, thus waiving his right to raise these issues on federal habeas corpus.
-
The court held that the Alabama courts erred in denying the habeas corpus petition, finding that the appellant was denied his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right to a speedy trial due to an unconstitutional nine-year delay.
-
The court held that the petitioner's federal claim regarding the denial of his right to appeal due to his counsel's error was fairly presented to the state courts, satisfying the exhaustion requirement.
-
-
440 F.2d 934·
5th Cir.·
1971-03-24
·cited 28×
The court held that prior convictions can be used for impeachment even if obtained without counsel, and that the petitioner's other claims regarding ineffective counsel, suppressed evidence, parole revocation, and discovery were without merit.
-
432 F.2d 1072·
7th Cir.·
1970-10-19
·cited 28×
A federal district court's ruling declaring a municipal ordinance unconstitutional is not binding on a state appellate tribunal when the ruling was made in an unrelated case and the state appeal was already pending.
-
427 F.2d 921·
5th Cir.·
1970-06-11
·cited 28×
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding that the jury selection process did not violate the petitioner's constitutional rights.
-
423 F.2d 948·
8th Cir.·
1970-03-19
·cited 28×
The federal court erred in denying a habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing when the state court hearing was deficient.
-
The court held that a petitioner alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, even retained counsel, has alleged sufficient facts to compel an evidentiary hearing, as gross unfairness in conviction constitutes state action.
-
413 F.2d 936·
4th Cir.·
1969-07-25
·cited 28×
The court held that the Army arbitrarily and capriciously denied the applicant conscientious objector status, violating due process and regulations.
-
408 F.2d 313·
5th Cir.·
1969-02-28
·cited 28×
The use of a constitutionally void conviction for sentence enhancement in a one-stage recidivist trial is inherently prejudicial and violates due process, even if other valid convictions exist.
-
There is no constitutional right to appointed counsel for indigent defendants in state post-conviction proceedings.
-
The court held that a petitioner seeking discharge as a conscientious objector must first exhaust available military remedies before seeking federal habeas corpus relief.
-
395 F.2d 321·
8th Cir.·
1968-06-10
·cited 28×
The court held that a petitioner is bound by his counsel's deliberate strategic waiver of constitutional objections, even if the petitioner himself did not knowingly participate in the decision, precluding federal habeas relief.