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 trial judge's failure to provide a form for an acquittal verdict, coupled with instructions, constituted an impermissible judicial comment on guilt, denying the defendant a fair trial.
-
The court held that the jury's observation of a co-defendant's guilty plea and the judge's comment on it in the jury charge, while not ideal, did not constitute reversible error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt and the lack of demonstrable unfairness.
-
The court held that a prisoner's claims of cruel and unusual punishment, even if not solely racially motivated, are not necessarily resolved by a prior class action order on prison desegregation and warrant a forum.
-
The court held that the district court should conduct an evidentiary hearing on the petitioner's claims regarding his right to a belated appeal and the state's responsibility for the delay.
-
A witness before a grand jury cannot impede the investigation by raising issues that could be litigated later by an indicted defendant.
-
The court did not explicitly state a holding as this is a special concurrence commenting on a point of law.
-
The court held that the district court erred in denying a writ of habeas corpus without a full evidentiary hearing, as the petitioner raised substantial constitutional claims that required further factual development.
-
The Supreme Court decisions in Massiah and Escobedo should not be applied retroactively to void convictions that occurred before their pronouncements.
-
338 F.2d 48·
10th Cir.·
1964-11-12
·cited 22×
The court held that the appellant competently and understandingly waived his right to counsel, and the district court's finding of waiver was adequately supported by the record.
-
The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the writ of habeas corpus because the disciplinary actions taken by prison officials were within their authority and not cruel and inhuman.
-
302 F.2d 286·
8th Cir.·
1962-04-17
·cited 22×
The court held that issues not raised in the trial court cannot be considered on appeal, and the trial court properly dismissed the petition.
-
-
250 F.2d 654·
6th Cir.·
1958-01-03
·cited 22×
The court held that the appellants failed to demonstrate a denial of due process due to ineffective assistance of counsel, and thus their petition for a writ of habeas corpus was properly denied.
-
200 F.2d 490·
5th Cir.·
1952-12-10
·cited 22×
A federal sentence's commencement date is governed by statute and cannot be altered by the sentencing judge's wording, especially when the delay is due to the defendant's own actions.
-
The court held that a federal prisoner seeking habeas corpus relief after denial of a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 must demonstrate the inadequacy of the § 2255 remedy, and a second or successive § 2255 motion is generally not permitted.
-
174 F.2d 961·
D.C. Cir.·
1949-04-15
·cited 22×
A person deprived of liberty by U.S. officials in violation of the Constitution has a substantive right to habeas corpus, and this right cannot be defeated by jurisdictional omissions; the petition may be filed in the district court with jurisdiction over the officials exercising
-
The court held that a defendant cannot raise the issue of conflicting jurisdiction between state and federal courts, as this is a matter of comity solely for the offended sovereign to address. It also held that a hearing on a habeas corpus petition is not required when only quest
-
160 F.2d 164·
9th Cir.·
1947-02-27
·cited 22×
The court held that the alien's re-entry into the United States was illegal because he was ineligible for citizenship, and therefore the deportation order was legal and valid.
-
150 F.2d 3·
9th Cir.·
1945-06-01
·cited 22×
A state parole board has the authority to parole a prisoner into the custody of federal authorities to serve a federal sentence, and this action triggers the commencement of the federal sentence.
-
146 F.2d 95·
6th Cir.·
1944-12-14
·cited 22×
The court held that a defendant's knowing acquiescence in his attorney's conduct, even if negligent or misconduct, prevents the attorney's actions from constituting grounds for habeas corpus relief under the Fourteenth Amendment.
-
140 F.2d 686·
D.C. Cir.·
1944-02-07
·cited 22×
The court held that a petition for a writ of habeas corpus is not the proper vehicle to challenge a conviction based on allegations of perjury, especially when the judgment is not void.
-
138 F.2d 312·
3d Cir.·
1943-10-06
·cited 22×
The court held that the wife failed to demonstrate that the draft board's reclassification of her husband from III-A to I-A was arbitrary or capricious, thus not entitling him to judicial relief.
-
The court held that the failure to perfect an appeal is not grounds for habeas corpus relief, and the sentence imposed was not excessive as each count charged a distinct offense.
-
This case reviews a habeas corpus proceeding where the plaintiff in error was denied bail on a first-degree murder charge. The appellate court determined that the evidence did not clearly establish premeditated design, thus entitling the plaintiff in error to bail.
-
46 F.4th 1193·
11th Cir.·
2022-08-24
·cited 21×
David Freeman appealed a district court's denial of his federal habeas petition challenging his 1996 conviction for capital murder and death sentence based on claims that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance at the penalty phase by failing to conduct a reasonable mit
-
945 F.3d 1310·
11th Cir.·
2019-12-23
·cited 21×
The court held that the statutory text requires a showing of bad faith for the removal period to be extended due to an incomplete travel document application, and that the district court erred by not holding an evidentiary hearing on the issue of good faith.
-
Frederick Whatley murdered a store owner in Georgia in 1995, was convicted, and received a death sentence. The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed his conviction on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim regarding his trial lawyer's failure to investigate and
-
Rodney Tyrone Lowe appeals his death sentence for the 1990 first-degree murder of Donna Burnell. The Florida Supreme Court affirms his sentence, rejecting claims including Hurst challenges, proportionality arguments, and various trial errors related to jury instructions, evidenti
-
236 So. 3d 981·
Fla.·
2018-02-15
·cited 21×
Eric Scott Branch, a death row inmate with an active execution warrant, appealed a circuit court's denial of his second successive motion for postconviction relief and petitioned for habeas corpus. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial, rejecting Branch's claims that his
-
59 So. 3d 1182·
Fla. 4th DCA·
2011-04-11
·cited 21×
Former husband in a dissolution of marriage action seeks to quash a civil contempt commitment order for failure to pay alimony. The court quashes the commitment order because the trial court's finding that the husband has present ability to pay based on equity in his home was spe
-
3 So. 3d 1091·
Fla.·
2009-01-30
·cited 21×
Kayle Bates, convicted of first-degree murder in 1982 and sentenced to death, 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 of relief on all claims, including DNA testing
-
1 So. 3d 262·
Fla. 4th DCA·
2009-01-05
·cited 21×
Jose Abreu-Gutierrez challenged his involuntary commitment for restoration of competency to stand trial, arguing the commitment was illegal. The appellate court held that because no evidence established his mental illness was amenable to treatment or that he could be restored to
-
987 So. 2d 1·
Fla.·
2008-01-10
·cited 21×
Ronald Lee Williams challenges his death sentence for first-degree murder arising from a drug-trafficking operation. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of postconviction relief regarding guilt-phase claims but reversed the denial of Williams' ineffective assistance of
-
954 So. 2d 1216·
Fla. 3d DCA·
2007-04-18
·cited 21×
The court held that the defendant's claim for additional credit for time served was inconsistent with the terms of the plea agreement he accepted.
-
952 So. 2d 484·
Fla.·
2006-11-02
·cited 21×
Meryl McDonald, a death row inmate, appealed the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion and petitioned for habeas corpus relief. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of both the postconviction motion and the habeas petition, finding that McDonald's trial counsel
-
Linda Michael, a Florida prisoner serving a life sentence for second-degree murder, appealed the denial of her federal habeas petition challenging her conviction and sentence. Michael claimed her trial counsel was ineffective under the Sixth Amendment for failing to discover and
-
846 So. 2d 405·
Fla.·
2003-03-06
·cited 21×
George James Trepal appeals denial of postconviction relief following his conviction for the first-degree murder of Peggy Carr through thallium poisoning. The core issue involves whether false and misleading scientific testimony by FBI chemist Roger Martz, combined with other all
-
827 So. 2d 974·
Fla.·
2002-09-19
·cited 21×
The Florida Supreme Court consolidated four cases in which petitioners sought review of district court denials of relief issued as bare per curiam decisions without opinion or explanation. The Court held that it lacks discretionary review and extraordinary writ jurisdiction to re
-
Thomas Gudinas, a death row inmate convicted of first-degree murder and sexual battery, sought postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and habeas corpus relief. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's denial of all postconviction claims a
-
Linroy Bottoson, a death row inmate with an active death warrant, appealed the trial court's denial of his successive motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851 and filed a successive habeas corpus petition. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed
-
Florida's Supreme Court affirmed a trial court's decision vacating John Huggins' death sentence and murder conviction, finding that the State violated Brady v. Maryland by suppressing evidence that could have impeached a key witness and undermined the credibility of the prosecuti
-
784 So. 2d 1091·
Fla.·
2001-05-03
·cited 21×
William Frederick Happ, a death-sentenced inmate, petitioned for habeas corpus relief based on claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. The Florida Supreme Court denied all five claims, holding that appellate counsel's performance fell within the acceptable range an
-
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a trial court's denial of a death row inmate's motion to vacate his sentence. The inmate argued that his codefendant's subsequent life sentence for a related murder constituted newly discovered evidence. The court found this claim lacked merit b
-
Clarence Hill seeks reconsideration of his death sentence for murdering a police officer during a 1982 bank robbery in Florida. The Florida Supreme Court reexamines its harmless error analysis after a federal court identified that the trial judge erroneously found the murder was
-
641 So. 2d 847·
Fla.·
1994-06-16
·cited 21×
The court held that the petitioner's claims are procedurally barred, and thus he is not entitled to habeas corpus relief.
-
A petitioner cannot establish cause for procedural default based on ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel when there is no constitutional right to counsel in such proceedings.
-
863 F.2d 1337·
7th Cir.·
1988-12-13
·cited 21×
The court held that federal habeas review of the Fourth Amendment claim was barred by Stone v. Powell because the state courts provided a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue. The court also held that the prosecutor's comments on the defendant's silence, while improper
-
The court held that the failure of Thomas's attorneys to file a brief on the State's appeal from the suppression ruling constituted a complete denial of counsel at a critical stage, violating the Sixth Amendment, and that this violation could not be considered harmless error.
-
847 F.2d 561·
9th Cir.·
1988-05-24
·cited 21×
A defendant's statement, "Not without my attorney. Well, ask your questions, and I will answer those I see fit," constitutes an unequivocal selective waiver of the right to counsel, allowing subsequent interrogation on topics the defendant chooses to answer.
-
834 F.2d 853·
9th Cir.·
1987-12-21
·cited 21×
The court held that the defendant was competent to waive his right to counsel, that the waiver was made knowingly and intelligently, and that he was not prejudiced by his attorney's advice to self-represent.