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
-
736 F.2d 446·
8th Cir.·
1984-05-29
·cited 26×
The Parole Commission violated 18 U.S.C. § 4206(c) by deviating from parole guidelines without providing a statement of reasons. The court reversed the denial of habeas corpus relief.
-
The Florida Supreme Court denied Alvin Ford's petition for habeas corpus and application to stay his execution, rejecting his claims regarding jury instructions and racial discrimination in death penalty application, and holding that section 922.07 establishes the exclusive statu
-
735 F.2d 684·
2d Cir.·
1984-05-18
·cited 26×
The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies for his constitutional collateral estoppel claim regarding the Moresco evidence, as it was not clearly presented as a federal constitutional issue to the state courts.
-
A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel during state post-conviction proceedings is not cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, as habeas corpus reviews the detention itself, not collateral proceedings.
-
-
The court held that the jury's consideration of prior homicides as non-statutory aggravating circumstances, even if error under state law, did not violate the federal Constitution. It also held that the North Carolina Supreme Court's proportionality review was constitutionally ad
-
The court held that the trial court did not err in excusing prospective jurors who were unequivocally opposed to the death penalty and that no constitutional duty arose to order a competency examination based on the information presented.
-
710 F.2d 1267·
7th Cir.·
1983-06-29
·cited 26×
The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of attempted rape, as the evidence did not provide a reasonable basis for acquittal on the greater charge and conviction on the lesser charge.
-
709 F.2d 1274·
9th Cir.·
1983-06-21
·cited 26×
The court's holding is not explicitly stated as the opinion is a concurrence.
-
-
701 F.2d 494·
5th Cir.·
1983-03-28
·cited 26×
The court held that a federal habeas corpus petitioner must exhaust state remedies by presenting the substance of their claim, including new factual evidence, to state courts before seeking federal relief.
-
702 F.2d 207·
10th Cir.·
1983-03-09
·cited 26×
Written findings of fact and conclusions of law are not constitutionally required for probation revocation if the transcript and record enable a reviewing court to determine the basis for the decision.
-
Noncompliance with a state contemporaneous-objection rule bars federal habeas review absent a showing of cause and prejudice; the identification was reliable despite suggestive procedures.
-
The court concurred in the result but would not consider due process claims raised for the first time on appeal.
-
694 F.2d 908·
2d Cir.·
1982-12-02
·cited 26×
The court held that the jury instructions, despite containing a presumption of intent, were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to repeated emphasis on the state's burden of proof and the need to determine intent from all circumstances.
-
The court held that due process requires prison disciplinary committees to make a good faith inquiry into the reliability of confidential informants when imposing severe sanctions, and the record must reflect this inquiry.
-
676 F.2d 434·
11th Cir.·
1982-04-15
·cited 26×
Alvin Bernard Ford was convicted of first-degree murder for shooting a wounded police officer during an armed robbery and sentenced to death in Florida. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, rejecting Ford's seven constitutional challenges to his convi
-
The Sixth Amendment right to counsel, as incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment, includes the right to have the trial judge accord weight to the attorney-client relationship when deciding whether to grant a continuance due to the temporary unavailability of a defendant's chosen
-
648 F.2d 196·
3d Cir.·
1981-05-07
·cited 26×
The court held that the Parole Commission has broad discretion to consider presentence reports, including information about dismissed indictments, when making parole decisions, and that subsequent administrative action rendered the district court's premature consideration of the
-
648 F.2d 135·
3d Cir.·
1981-03-31
·cited 26×
The district court erroneously dismissed the habeas corpus petition for lack of jurisdiction.
-
641 F.2d 1029·
1st Cir.·
1981-02-13
·cited 26×
The court held that cross-examination regarding a defendant's post-arrest silence is permissible when the defendant makes post-arrest statements inconsistent with their exculpatory trial testimony, as this does not violate Doyle v. Ohio.
-
638 F.2d 1115·
8th Cir.·
1981-01-21
·cited 26×
The court held that ineffective assistance of counsel can only vitiate a guilty plea if there is a nexus between the alleged ineffectiveness and the plea itself.
-
-
627 F.2d 742·
5th Cir.·
1980-10-10
·cited 26×
The Sixth Amendment does not grant a constitutional right to impeach a witness's general credibility with evidence of prior bad acts not resulting in a conviction.
-
628 F.2d 1044·
7th Cir.·
1980-07-02
·cited 26×
The majority holds that a state court judge's inquiry into the numerical division of an undischarged jury does not violate due process.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claim of factual incompetency to plead guilty was exhausted and raised a substantial issue requiring an evidentiary hearing, but his claim regarding the factual basis for the plea was unexhausted.
-
The court held that the record supported the trial court and jury findings that the confessions were voluntarily made, and thus federal intervention was not justified.
-
The court held that statements made by a convicted individual to inmates were inadmissible hearsay because they were not sufficiently against his penal interest, and that trial counsel's decisions regarding venue and continuance did not constitute ineffective assistance.
-
593 F.2d 806·
7th Cir.·
1979-03-20
·cited 26×
The court held that the Parole Commission's application of its guidelines did not violate the Due Process Clause or the Ex Post Facto Clause because the petitioner received individualized consideration and the guidelines are not law.
-
The court's discussion and decision on an unnecessary Sixth Amendment question creates a large exception to Stone v. Powell, potentially endangering its future application in habeas corpus cases.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to challenge the use of a prior invalid juvenile transfer conviction in a habitual criminal proceeding is a valid Sixth Amendment claim, notwithstanding a prior guilty plea.
-
579 F.2d 1022·
7th Cir.·
1978-06-29
·cited 26×
Federal jurisdiction is present because the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act creates federal rights, but the exercise of that jurisdiction is premature as the petitioner has not exhausted state remedies.
-
-
The court held that the prosecutor's improper questioning of the defendant about his post-arrest silence was not harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt, requiring the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus.
-
566 F.2d 526·
5th Cir.·
1978-01-19
·cited 26×
The district court lacked jurisdiction to entertain a motion to correct sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, or a petition for habeas corpus, as the issues raised were either outside the scope of § 2255 or the court lacked proper venue for habeas corpus.
-
561 F.2d 560·
4th Cir.·
1977-09-16
·cited 26×
-
A parolee's claim that a delay in their revocation hearing violates due process must be judged by the standards set forth in Barker v. Wingo, not by a presumption of prejudice based solely on the length of the delay.
-
562 F.2d 903·
3d Cir.·
1977-08-23
·cited 26×
The court held that a federal habeas corpus court cannot relitigate a Fourth Amendment claim if the state provided an opportunity for full and fair litigation, even if the federal court disagrees with the state court's factual findings.
-
560 F.2d 288·
7th Cir.·
1977-08-12
·cited 26×
The court held that the district court correctly applied the reasonable doubt standard from United States v. Agurs and that the undisclosed evidence did not create a reasonable doubt of the petitioner's guilt.
-
555 F.2d 103·
3d Cir.·
1977-04-22
·cited 26×
The dissenting judge believes the jury charge improperly placed the burden of persuasion regarding provocation on the defendant, violating Mullaney v. Wilbur.
-
551 F.2d 251·
10th Cir.·
1977-03-02
·cited 26×
The court held that a parolee's due process rights were not violated by the revocation of parole, even though the underlying state conviction was later reversed.
-
540 F.2d 938·
8th Cir.·
1976-08-20
·cited 26×
The court held that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel at trial due to his attorney's gross incompetence and lack of diligence, which prejudiced the outcome.
-
The court held that a prosecutor's comment on a defendant's silence after receiving Miranda warnings constitutes a violation of the Fifth Amendment, and such error is not harmless when it is extensive and stresses an inference of guilt.
-
533 F.2d 1322·
2d Cir.·
1976-02-26
·cited 26×
The court held that a habeas corpus petitioner's claims of an involuntarily entered guilty plea, denial of effective assistance of counsel, and denial of the right of allocution were correctly rejected by the district court.
-
The court held that the classification of a prisoner as a 'Special Offender' based on the nature of their convictions does not violate due process, and such classification is within the sound discretion of prison officials.
-
529 F.2d 1374·
4th Cir.·
1975-10-13
·cited 26×
A prisoner's allegations of an unkept plea bargain may entitle them to an evidentiary hearing, even if they denied promises at arraignment, if they reasonably allege why their prior statements should not be conclusive.
-
The court held that the defendant may have been deprived of effective assistance of counsel due to counsel's failure to investigate and present critical evidence regarding the prosecution's key witness's mental condition.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies because the federal constitutional claim was not fairly presented to the state courts.
-
The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed O'Berry's conviction and sentence, finding no reversible error and holding that petitioner's critical contentions were not preserved for appellate review due to lack of proper and timely objection at trial.
-
The court held that the petitioner has not exhausted state remedies because his federal constitutional claims were not fairly presented to the New York state courts.