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 appellant's failure to raise constitutional objections to jury instructions at trial procedurally barred federal habeas review, absent a showing of cause and prejudice, and that her other claims were without merit.
-
A prisoner who has fully served a state sentence is not 'in custody' for purposes of federal habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, even if the conviction has collateral consequences. However, a prisoner can attack a federal sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 even if it has not yet b
-
737 F.2d 877·
10th Cir.·
1984-06-26
·cited 12×
The court held that a federal habeas corpus petitioner waived his constitutional claims by failing to raise them at his court-martial, absent a showing of cause and prejudice.
-
736 F.2d 1160·
7th Cir.·
1984-06-12
·cited 12×
The court held that a trial judge's initial doubt about a defendant's competency to stand trial can be dissipated by subsequent evidence and reports, and the judge is not automatically required to hold a hearing if that doubt is reasonably resolved.
-
The court held that the district court erred in deeming itself bound by state court findings and that the state evidentiary hearing was inadequate to correct a due process violation at sentencing.
-
The court held that amending the indictment without returning to the grand jury, changing the charge from direct arson to arson for hire, violated the petitioner's due process rights by denying him fair notice of the charges and sufficient time to prepare a defense.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate he would have received a more favorable parole determination under the prior guidelines, thus affirming the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition.
-
726 F.2d 75·
2d Cir.·
1984-01-23
·cited 12×
The court held that the Parole Commission abused its discretion by misclassifying the appellant's offense as a Greatest I property offense instead of a Very High opiate offense.
-
724 F.2d 1106·
4th Cir.·
1984-01-13
·cited 12×
The court reversed the district court's decision, finding that even if discretion existed to depart from a prior order, the district court abused that discretion.
-
723 F.2d 59·
10th Cir.·
1983-12-12
·cited 12×
The Parole Commission may consider evidence of offenses charged in dismissed counts when determining parole eligibility, provided it does not violate a plea agreement or a government representation. The Commission did not abuse its discretion in rating the offense severity or set
-
720 F.2d 9·
8th Cir.·
1983-10-19
·cited 12×
The court held that the Parole Commission must reconsider the petitioner's offense classification due to inconsistent application of its regulations and failure to consider a codefendant's parole status.
-
442 So. 2d 177·
Fla.·
1983-10-13
·cited 12×
The Florida Supreme Court held that when a parolee arrested on felony charges is not given a hearing within ten days as required by statute, the automatic temporary revocation of parole is waived and the parolee must be released, preventing the state from later pursuing revocatio
-
A guilty plea is not invalidated by misinformation regarding parole eligibility, as parole is considered a collateral, not direct, consequence of the plea.
-
718 F.2d 500·
1st Cir.·
1983-09-30
·cited 12×
The court held that the underrepresentation of 18-34 year olds on petit juries, due to the jury selection system, constituted a prima facie violation of the fair-cross-section requirement.
-
The Supreme Court's Doyle rule, prohibiting impeachment by post-Miranda silence, applies to cases on direct review when Doyle was decided.
-
The court held that a federal court should not adjudicate habeas corpus claims if there is a reasonable possibility that a state court exception to a procedural bar rule would allow the petitioner to raise those claims.
-
The court held that a federal sentence does not commence until the defendant is received at a federal facility for service, and there is no constitutional right to concurrent sentences or credit for time served in state custody for unrelated offenses.
-
A habeas petitioner cannot claim a violation of another person's Fifth Amendment rights when that person's confession was determined to be voluntary and was not used at the petitioner's trial.
-
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal from the denial of the motion to correct the presentence report.
-
709 F.2d 730·
D.C. Cir.·
1983-06-10
·cited 12×
The court held that a thirty-three month delay in a parole revocation hearing, while a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 4214(c), did not warrant habeas corpus relief because the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice.
-
The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a federal habeas corpus petition dismissal without a certificate of probable cause and will remand for the district court to consider granting one.
-
The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and right to counsel at lineup, but affirmed the denial of the claim regarding an impermissibly suggestive lineup.
-
The Parole Commission has the authority to withdraw an executed parole violator warrant and hold it in abeyance pending the outcome of related state criminal charges, even after a constitutionally infirm revocation hearing has occurred.
-
707 F.2d 341·
8th Cir.·
1983-05-11
·cited 12×
The court held that the petitioner's claims lacked merit and the district court's denial of the writ of habeas corpus should be affirmed.
-
The court, in a concurring opinion, argues that the established constitutional standard for jury impartiality, allowing jurors with preconceived notions of guilt if they promise to be impartial, is flawed and should be replaced with a stricter standard.
-
707 F.2d 323·
8th Cir.·
1983-05-06
·cited 12×
The court held that detrimental reliance is not necessary to enforce a plea bargain offer, adopting the reasoning of Cooper v. United States.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claim of insufficient evidence was adequately presented to state courts and that the futility exception to the exhaustion requirement remains valid.
-
A successive habeas corpus petition cannot be dismissed under Rule 9(b) for abuse of the writ based solely on the petitioner's response to a form question, especially when appointed counsel's ineffectiveness prevented the petitioner from adequately responding to the respondent's
-
698 F.2d 418·
10th Cir.·
1983-01-20
·cited 12×
The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas corpus petition without issuing a show cause order, as the petitioner's allegations, if true, would entitle him to relief.
-
The court held that a federal court may grant habeas corpus relief if the petitioner has raised the same issues on direct appeal in state court, as this satisfies the exhaustion requirement.
-
A guilty plea is not subject to collateral attack based on a coerced confession unless counsel was ineffective, and there is no constitutional right to a jury determination of competency to stand trial or plead guilty.
-
691 F.2d 992·
11th Cir.·
1982-11-15
·cited 12×
The court held that the district court correctly denied the federal prisoner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus because the Parole Commission's procedural errors were either cured or did not prejudice the petitioner.
-
692 F.2d 66·
8th Cir.·
1982-11-08
·cited 12×
The court held that the district court properly dismissed the habeas petition, affirming that counsel was not ineffective for failing to raise an entrapment defense inconsistent with the petitioner's trial testimony, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction under fed
-
422 So. 2d 824·
Fla.·
1982-09-14
·cited 12×
James McCrae petitioned for habeas corpus and a stay of execution, challenging his death sentence for felony murder conviction. The Florida Supreme Court rejected all three grounds for relief, finding no fundamental error in jury instructions, no ineffective assistance of counsel
-
Difficulty in reprosecution due to delay in filing a habeas petition is not sufficient prejudice to warrant dismissal under Rule 9(a).
-
680 F.2d 1104·
5th Cir.·
1982-07-23
·cited 12×
A federal prisoner is not entitled to credit on his federal sentence for time spent in state custody for an unrelated offense unless the state confinement was exclusively the product of federal action.
-
682 F.2d 691·
7th Cir.·
1982-07-14
·cited 12×
The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment on a habeas corpus petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, as factual issues regarding trial strategy and counsel's awareness of witnesses required a hearing.
-
The court held that the petitioner's request for substitute counsel was dilatory and properly denied by the state trial court, and even if it were an error, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
Plea bargains involving lenient treatment of a third party are not per se unconstitutional, provided the prosecutor acts in good faith and the court carefully scrutinizes the plea. A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel against a prior attorney is waived if not raised in th
-
678 F.2d 634·
5th Cir.·
1982-06-18
·cited 12×
A guilty plea is valid even if the defendant is not informed that the sentence may run consecutively to a prior sentence.
-
-
Walker petitioned for a belated appeal of his 1973 rape conviction, claiming he had requested his court-appointed attorney file an appeal that was never filed. The Florida appellate court denied the petition, holding that the doctrine of laches precluded the belated appeal given
-
673 F.2d 1169·
10th Cir.·
1982-04-01
·cited 12×
The court held that the Parole Commission's denial of parole did not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause or the Equal Protection Clause, nor did it unconstitutionally delegate judicial power.
-
The court held that an individual subject to a deportation order who has absconded and failed to comply with court orders is disentitled from calling upon the court's resources to determine his claims.
-
673 F.2d 58·
2d Cir.·
1982-03-08
·cited 12×
The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding that the appellant had not exhausted state remedies for two of his claims and that the one exhausted claim regarding the prosecutor's use of a co-defendant's confession did not violate the Confrontation Clause.
-
409 So. 2d 1212·
Fla. 1st DCA·
1982-02-19
·cited 12×
In this habeas corpus petition, petitioners challenged the denial of bail in an armed robbery case, arguing that affidavits alone were insufficient to establish that proof of guilt was evident or the presumption great. The court held that the state may satisfy its burden through
-
671 F.2d 266·
8th Cir.·
1982-02-10
·cited 12×
The court held that the Parole Commission's reclassification of offense severity was a reasonable exercise of discretion and that the Notice of Action provided sufficient explanation. The court also found no error in the consideration of institutional adjustment or the calculatio
-
The court held that a defendant must be given credit for all time spent in jail as a condition of probation before sentencing, even if probation is revoked.
-
658 F.2d 1126·
6th Cir.·
1981-09-09
·cited 12×
The court held that the majority's interpretation of due process protection for post-arrest silence, absent Miranda warnings, is contrary to Supreme Court precedent.
-
658 F.2d 218·
4th Cir.·
1981-08-20
·cited 12×
The court held that the prolonged custodial interrogation of the defendant without timely Miranda warnings violated his constitutional rights, and any subsequent statements were tainted.