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 district court erred in denying the habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing because the state court applied an incorrect legal standard for effective assistance of counsel, making factual findings unreliable.
-
628 F.2d 926·
5th Cir.·
1980-10-24
·cited 27×
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, finding that the petitioner failed to meet his burden of proof regarding lack of counsel and that other claims were barred by unreasonable delay and prejudice under Rule 9(a).
-
The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Ballew v. Georgia, which declared five-member juries unconstitutional, should be applied retroactively to invalidate convictions obtained by such juries.
-
583 F.2d 1373·
5th Cir.·
1978-11-16
·cited 27×
The court held that the district court erred by failing to first determine if a meaningful retrospective competency hearing was practicable and by improperly placing the burden of proof on the state.
-
587 F.2d 968·
9th Cir.·
1978-10-26
·cited 27×
The court held that the defendant's second and third expulsions from the courtroom were erroneous and not harmless error, as his misconduct did not rise to the level that necessitated his removal to ensure a fair trial, especially when considering his right to self-representation
-
A district court lacks the power to grant bail to a habeas petitioner after the court of appeals has issued its mandate forthwith, as this constitutes an independent order respecting custody.
-
The court held that the federal district court should have abstained from deciding the case pending the outcome of the state habeas corpus proceedings.
-
567 F.2d 632·
5th Cir.·
1978-02-08
·cited 27×
The court held that the district court erred by not requiring a respondent to answer or holding an evidentiary hearing before denying habeas corpus relief.
-
555 F.2d 183·
8th Cir.·
1977-05-12
·cited 27×
A sentencing judge's mistaken belief about the effect of parole guidelines, promulgated before sentencing, does not constitute a 'critical error' allowing sentence modification under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
-
530 F.2d 1231·
5th Cir.·
1976-04-30
·cited 27×
The dissenting judge argues that denying credit for pre-sentence and post-sentence detention to indigent defendants solely because of their inability to make bail constitutes unconstitutional discrimination based on wealth.
-
The State of Florida appeals a habeas corpus order granting Cox's application to prevent his extradition to California. The court holds that in extradition proceedings, a trial court's inquiry is narrowly limited to jurisdictional prerequisites and cannot consider guilt/innocence
-
429 F.2d 104·
2d Cir.·
1970-07-06
·cited 27×
A guilty plea induced by defense counsel's good-faith, but erroneous, sentence estimate or misstatement of law regarding withdrawal does not render the plea involuntary, absent evidence of government inducement.
-
Matera appeals a circuit court's denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging a $250,000 bail as excessive. The appellate court holds that under Florida's Constitution, the bail amount was indeed excessive and amounted to a denial of bail for a non-capital felony, reversing t
-
167 So. 2d 868·
Fla.·
1964-10-07
·cited 27×
The denial of an adjudication of insolvency, based on the perceived frivolousness of the appeal, can illegally preclude appellate review, but the petitioner's specific claims for relief from his original conviction are without merit.
-
The court held that a resident of the United States claiming citizenship, even if facing exclusion proceedings, is entitled to a judicial trial, and that the appellee's return from wartime service did not constitute an 'entry' under immigration laws.
-
The court held that a defendant cannot use the alleged erroneous classification by a selective service board as a defense in a criminal prosecution for failing to comply with the board's order.
-
Frank Hyde and C. K. Slaton petitioned for habeas corpus seeking release on bail after their gaming law convictions were affirmed on appeal and they received a gubernatorial reprieve. The Florida Supreme Court denied the petition, holding that no court has jurisdiction to fix bai
-
The Eleventh Circuit dismissed the appeal as moot and vacated the district court's judgment because the petitioner's release from detention rendered the case non-justiciable, as he sought only release and did not demonstrate any ongoing collateral consequences.
-
39 So. 3d 275·
Fla.·
2010-05-06
·cited 26×
Manuel Antonio Rodriguez was convicted of three first-degree murders and sentenced to death. On appeal, he challenged the conviction and sentence through postconviction motions and a habeas petition, raising numerous claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, Brady violations (
-
983 So. 2d 502·
Fla.·
2008-03-13
·cited 26×
The Florida Supreme Court imposed sanctions against James L. Tate, Jr., a state prisoner, for abusing the court's processes by filing eighteen separate frivolous petitions since 2002, all seeking to vacate his 1994 conviction for attempted first-degree murder. The Court barred Ta
-
913 So. 2d 514·
Fla.·
2005-07-07
·cited 26×
Michael Robinson, a death-row inmate, appealed the denial of his postconviction motion for relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's denial of all relief, rejecting Robins
-
Paul Alfred Brown, a death row inmate convicted of murder, petitions the Florida Supreme Court for habeas corpus relief, claiming his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise constitutional challenges to his death sentence based on Apprendi v. New Jersey. The court
-
633 So. 2d 1051·
Fla.·
1993-09-09
·cited 26×
Etheria Jackson, a death row inmate, appealed the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion and filed a habeas corpus petition. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's denial, finding no merit to Jackson's ineffective assistance of counsel claims, procedural bar
-
Kenneth Cumbie was convicted in 1987 of attempting to sexually assault his five-year-old stepdaughter after she testified via one-way closed circuit television outside his presence. The Eleventh Circuit held that the trial court violated Cumbie's Sixth Amendment right to face-to-
-
The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the defendant's convictions for possession with intent to distribute cocaine and conspiracy to distribute cocaine, and that the jury instructions did not contain plain error.
-
565 So. 2d 700·
Fla.·
1990-07-17
·cited 26×
Jerry White petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus and stay of execution following his conviction for murder and death sentence. The Florida Supreme Court rejected all of White's claims, including ineffective assistance of counsel, appellate deficiencies, and sentencing procedure
-
905 F.2d 1090·
7th Cir.·
1990-06-25
·cited 26×
A federal court has jurisdiction under § 2254 to order a state to resentence a prisoner free of any effect of an earlier conviction in another jurisdiction, even if the prior sentence has expired.
-
The court clarifies its prior order regarding a Public Defender's motion to withdraw as counsel in 200 cases due to backlog, denying withdrawal in 100 cases while explaining the reasoning.
-
A federal court must stay a prisoner's 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim challenging the duration of confinement, rather than dismiss it, to allow exhaustion of state remedies via habeas corpus.
-
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, affirming the denial.
-
The court held that the petitioner's resentencing did not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause, Equal Protection Clause, or Due Process Clause, and that he received effective assistance of counsel.
-
876 F.2d 1496·
11th Cir.·
1989-07-11
·cited 26×
The court held that the 1983 Florida statute altering gain time calculations is an unconstitutional ex post facto law as applied to prisoners convicted of offenses prior to its enactment because it makes the punishment more onerous.
-
The court held that the conditions of confinement on Pennsylvania's death rows did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment, but vacated the district court's ruling on access to courts for further proceedings.
-
855 F.2d 1256·
7th Cir.·
1988-07-29
·cited 26×
The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider a second post-judgment motion after a notice of appeal was filed, and that materials not presented to the district court could not be considered on appeal. The court also found that the jury's verdict was supp
-
842 F.2d 1179·
10th Cir.·
1988-03-21
·cited 26×
A guilty plea is not rendered involuntary by an attorney's inaccurate prediction of parole eligibility or by an attorney's promise of unrelated legal representation, especially when the defendant affirms the plea's voluntariness in court.
-
The court held that a prior stay of execution order dissolved by its own terms upon the conclusion of the appeal it was granted for, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a Rule 60(b) motion seeking relief from a judgment denying habeas corpus relief
-
The court held that the trial court's refusal to appoint an expert in hypnosis for an indigent defendant violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process.
-
The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the defendant's double jeopardy claim, as the record was insufficient to resolve whether the two conspiracy charges constituted a single offense.
-
813 F.2d 664·
5th Cir.·
1987-03-24
·cited 26×
-
The court held that erroneous jury instructions on aiding and abetting, while incorrect under state law, were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and did not violate federal due process. The court also declined to address the ineffective assistance of counsel claim as it was not r
-
The court held that the Utah capital punishment statute is constitutional and that the appellant's death sentence was not imposed in violation of the Constitution. The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.
-
801 F.2d 324·
8th Cir.·
1986-09-16
·cited 26×
The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's order granting the writ of habeas corpus, finding the probation revocation violated fundamental fairness principles.
-
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that while a Sixth Amendment violation occurred, it was harmless error because the unmasked information was cumulative and did not contribute to the verdict.
-
The court held that the petitioner's allegation of systematic exclusion of Black persons from jury service was sufficient to warrant an evidentiary hearing, but his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel failed due to lack of prejudice.
-
770 F.2d 1482·
9th Cir.·
1985-09-12
·cited 26×
The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in shackling a defense witness, and the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice or the availability of less drastic alternatives.
-
769 F.2d 630·
9th Cir.·
1985-08-23
·cited 26×
The court held that the district court correctly denied Johnson's due process claims but erred in failing to rule on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
-
765 F.2d 581·
6th Cir.·
1985-06-20
·cited 26×
The court affirmed the Board of Immigration Appeals' refusals to reopen deportation proceedings and the district court's denial of habeas corpus, finding the petitions frivolous and without merit.
-
751 F.2d 1535·
11th Cir.·
1985-01-16
·cited 26×
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate substantial prejudice from the pre-indictment delay and that the delay was not for tactical advantage, thus affirming the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
-
The court held that a trial court's sua sponte declaration of a mistrial due to a flagrant violation of a rape shield law, even without explicit consent from the defendant, was supported by manifest necessity and did not bar a subsequent retrial.
-
742 F.2d 371·
7th Cir.·
1984-08-23
·cited 26×
A lawyer is not required to advise a client of every theoretically possible but practically hopeless defense, and failure to do so does not render a guilty plea involuntary or constitute ineffective assistance of counsel if prejudice cannot be shown.