Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus

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

• State ex rel Franklin C. Coody v. The Honorable Bernard Muszynski
  402 So. 2d 81· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-08-18 ·cited 12×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a civil contempt order for failure to pay child support must always permit the contemnor to purge the contempt by complying with the order, and a provision allowing purge only after a period of incarceration is improper.
• Escobedo v. Estelle
  650 F.2d 70· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-06 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  A state prisoner has exhausted state remedies for federal habeas corpus purposes when the federal claim has been fairly presented to the highest state court, even if that court did not explicitly address the claim in its opinion.
• Clements v. Louie L. Wainwright
  648 F.2d 979· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an appeal from a denial of a state prisoner's habeas corpus petition cannot proceed without a certificate of probable cause, and the district court must rule on the motion for such a certificate.
• Anders Steinsvik v. Vinzant
  640 F.2d 949· 9th Cir.· 1981-02-23 ·cited 12×
  The court should have held an evidentiary hearing to determine Steinsvik's mental capacity at the time of his guilty plea due to evidence of a recent drug overdose and history of psychological problems.
• Bivens v. Wyrick
  640 F.2d 179· 8th Cir.· 1981-02-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the pretrial and in-court identification procedures, as well as the prosecutor's conduct, did not violate due process, and the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing.
• Mondy v. Mondy
  395 So. 2d 193· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-02-13 ·cited 12×
  Father appeals trial court's award of temporary custody to Mother in a child custody dispute where Father removed children from Alabama to Idaho and Mother subsequently removed them to Florida. The court affirms, holding that Florida has jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custo
• Pate v. Smith
  637 F.2d 1068· 6th Cir.· 1981-01-09 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the trial judge's failure to conduct a competency hearing, despite evidence raising doubt about the petitioner's mental state, violated due process.
• Anthony v. Wilkinson
  637 F.2d 1130· 7th Cir.· 1980-12-23 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
• Bradley v. Emmett Fairfax
  634 F.2d 1126· 8th Cir.· 1980-11-26 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the disclosure of grand jury testimony to the Parole Commission was harmless error, and the presence of the prosecutor at the parole revocation hearing did not violate due process.
• Ismail Muslim ALI v. Gibson
  631 F.2d 1126· 3d Cir.· 1980-10-02 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the transfer of the prisoner was legally permissible under statutory and constitutional law, and that the prisoner failed to meet his burden of proof regarding prison conditions.
• Maslauskas v. U. S. Bd. OF Parole
  639 F.2d 935· 3d Cir.· 1980-06-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Parole Board lacked the authority to issue a second parole violator warrant after having already ordered the prisoner's release and reinstatement to parole supervision on the same grounds.
• Hussong v. Warden, Wis. State Reformatory
  623 F.2d 1185· 7th Cir.· 1980-06-06 ·cited 12×
• Jewell Jess Stone v. Cardwell
  620 F.2d 212· 9th Cir.· 1980-05-30 ·cited 12×
  The federal district court's finding that a state prisoner's guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily made is not clearly erroneous and is therefore affirmed.
• Warren v. Harvey
  632 F.2d 925· 2d Cir.· 1980-05-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Connecticut statute allowing commitment of insanity acquittees based on a preponderance of the evidence standard is facially constitutional, and that it was constitutionally applied to the appellant. The state met its burden of proving the appellant's dang
• C. L. B. v. Carlton L. Jones
  381 So. 2d 1178· Fla. 1st DCA· 1980-03-18 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that although the issues are moot due to the petitioner's transfer, they are of sufficient importance to rule on the merits regarding detention hearing timeliness and evidentiary requirements.
• Howard v. Howard
  378 So. 2d 1329· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-01-16 ·cited 12×
  A Florida court is not bound by a custody decree from another state if that state lacked jurisdiction to issue the decree, even if Florida has adopted the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act.
• Miller v. McCARTHY
  607 F.2d 854· 9th Cir.· 1979-10-31 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on claims that his nolo contendere plea was invalid due to lack of knowledge of the potential sentence and that he was denied effective assistance of counsel.
• Lucas v. Louie L. Wainwright
  604 F.2d 373· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-11 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the petitioner received reasonably effective assistance of counsel, and therefore his petition for habeas corpus was correctly denied.
• Cousin v. Blackburn
  597 F.2d 511· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-21 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the appellant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel due to plea discussions with the judge without consent and vindictive sentencing were without merit.
• United States v. Horsley
  599 F.2d 1265· 3d Cir.· 1979-06-07 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  A defendant is not entitled to collateral relief for a Rule 11 violation unless they demonstrate actual prejudice, meaning they were unaware of the charge's nature or would not have pleaded guilty if properly advised.
• Spenkelink v. Louie L. Wainwright
  372 So. 2d 927· Fla.· 1979-05-25 ·cited 12×
  The Court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, application for stay of execution, motion to intervene, and request for review of sentence.
• United States ex rel. Leroy Hairston v. Warden, Ill. State Penitentiary, Stateville Corr. Ctr.
  597 F.2d 604· 7th Cir.· 1979-04-30 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the state trial court's pre-trial statement that alibi evidence would be excluded if the notice statute was not complied with, effectively denied the defendant his right to present an alibi defense, thus violating due process under Wardius v. Oregon.
• Jordan v. Estelle
  594 F.2d 144· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-30 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that a habeas petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel when the record does not support the state's factual assertions.
• Passmore v. Estelle
  594 F.2d 115· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-27 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the state trial court's ruling barring impeachment by prior incarceration did not violate the Sixth Amendment, but the submission of a one-sentence appellate brief constituted ineffective assistance of counsel under the Fourteenth Amendment.
• Darrow v. Warden Gunn
  594 F.2d 767· 9th Cir.· 1979-04-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a retrospective competency hearing was permissible and that the evidence supported the finding that the defendant was competent to plead guilty.
• Roberts v. Brierton
  368 So. 2d 117· Fla. 1st DCA· 1979-03-08 ·cited 12×
  Roberts appealed a summary denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging his disciplinary hearing in prison. The court reversed, holding that Roberts was entitled to an order to show cause because he was denied the opportunity to present witnesses in his defense without any sh
• Beck v. Wilkes
  589 F.2d 901· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-16 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the delay in the parole revocation hearing did not violate due process and that the prisoner's transfer between federal facilities was lawful.
• Crawford v. Delbert C. Jackson
  589 F.2d 693· D.C. Cir.· 1978-11-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the expiration of a writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum does not automatically commence a federal sentence if the prisoner is not properly received for service of that sentence, and the sending state's jurisdiction remains uninterrupted.
• Bashlor v. Louie L. Wainwright
  369 So. 2d 695· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-08-10 ·cited 12×
  Charles Bashlor, convicted of murder in 1951 at age 16 and sentenced to life imprisonment, sought habeas corpus relief and a belated appeal based on the trial judge's alleged refusal to appoint appellate counsel as required by Douglas v. California. The court held that res judica
• Shelton v. Ciccone
  578 F.2d 1241· 8th Cir.· 1978-06-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the allegations surrounding the government's seven-year delay in executing federal sentences, if proven true, could establish a due process violation and warrant an evidentiary hearing.
• Mariano Salomon v. LaVALLEE
  575 F.2d 1051· 2d Cir.· 1978-05-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a remand to determine the precise degree of prejudice from joint representation is unnecessary when the record already demonstrates prejudice.
• Towe T. Aston v. Warden, Powhatan Corr. Ctr.
  574 F.2d 1169· 4th Cir.· 1978-04-18 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a writ of habeas corpus without an evidentiary hearing, as disputed facts regarding potential jury prejudice required further factual development.
• Burkhart v. Stoney Lane
  574 F.2d 346· 6th Cir.· 1978-04-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in summarily dismissing the habeas corpus petition without examining the trial record.
• Gammill v. Louie L. Wainwright
  357 So. 2d 714· Fla.· 1978-04-05 ·cited 12×·via Writ Of Habeas Corpus
  James Gammill was sentenced to 35 years in prison immediately after being declared a mentally disordered sex offender under Florida law. The Florida Supreme Court held that the trial court failed to follow proper procedure under Chapter 917 by imposing sentence before Gammill com
• Hayward v. Britt
  572 F.2d 1324· 9th Cir.· 1978-03-30 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  A motion for reconsideration, even if treated as a Rule 60(b) motion, does not toll the time for filing an appeal or affect the finality of the original judgment.
• United States v. Kent
  563 F.2d 239· 5th Cir.· 1977-11-17 ·cited 12×
  The district court lacked jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to entertain a motion to vacate a sentence when the parole guidelines were published and applicable before sentencing, even if the sentencing judge was unaware of their specific impact.
• Wagster v. Overberg
  560 F.2d 735· 6th Cir.· 1977-08-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the prosecutor's failure to disclose a witness's pretrial statement did not violate due process because the defense made only a general request and the statement did not create a reasonable doubt as to guilt.
• Macio Ennis v. LeFEVRE
  560 F.2d 1072· 2d Cir.· 1977-08-09 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court affirmed the denial of the petition because the appellant had not exhausted his state remedies regarding the ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
• Barfield v. State of Ala.
  552 F.2d 1114· 5th Cir.· 1977-05-26 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the defendant was not subjected to custodial interrogation under Miranda v. Arizona, as her statements were made voluntarily and not in a coercive environment.
• Bassett v. McCARTHY
  549 F.2d 616· 9th Cir.· 1977-01-06 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
• Payne v. United States
  539 F.2d 443· 5th Cir.· 1976-09-23 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of relief, finding the appellant's claims regarding parole denial and sentencing errors to be without merit.
• Pruitt v. Hutto
  542 F.2d 458· 8th Cir.· 1976-09-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a federal court should defer to state courts to determine if an issue can be litigated in a state post-conviction proceeding, especially when the state rule's application is unclear.
• Faye v. Gray
  541 F.2d 665· 7th Cir.· 1976-09-09 ·cited 12×
• Lyman T. Shepard v. United States Bd. OF Parole
  541 F.2d 322· 2d Cir.· 1976-09-07 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  A parolee detained pending a parole revocation hearing has a due process right to a meaningful opportunity to contest the detainer, including timely disclosure of evidence against him and a statement of reasons for the decision, even if an in-person hearing is not required.
• United States ex rel. Walter Bibbs v. Twomey
  538 F.2d 151· 7th Cir.· 1976-07-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the petitioner waived his right to challenge the introduction of prior convictions by failing to object at trial, and that oral argument on a habeas petition is discretionary.
• Lolita I. Alvarez v. Dist. Dir. OF the U. S. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  539 F.2d 1220· 9th Cir.· 1976-07-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appellee, a citizen of the Philippines, did not qualify as a special immigrant because she did not maintain a US residence and her extended stays abroad were not temporary visits. The district court erred in substituting its findings for those of the immig
• Noll v. The People OF the State OF Neb.
  537 F.2d 967· 8th Cir.· 1976-06-17 ·cited 12×
  Federal habeas corpus jurisdiction does not lie in the district court where the petitioner is not in the custody of the respondent, even if a prior conviction from that district was used to enhance a sentence in another state.
• Durkin v. Davis
  538 F.2d 1037· 4th Cir.· 1976-03-23 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  The court held that the petitioner had not exhausted state remedies by failing to properly present his federal claim to the state courts, and therefore the federal court should have dismissed the petition.
• United States ex rel. Agnes Scranton v. The State OF NEW York
  532 F.2d 292· 2d Cir.· 1976-03-15 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Petition
  A federal court should not grant habeas corpus relief to a state prisoner who has not exhausted all available state remedies, even if the prisoner claims a speedy trial violation.
• TOM v. Sutton
  533 F.2d 1101· 9th Cir.· 1976-03-10 ·cited 12×
  Indian tribal courts are not required by the Indian Civil Rights Act or tribal constitutions to provide appointed counsel to indigent defendants in criminal proceedings.