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
-
865 F.2d 44·
2d Cir.·
1989-01-10
·cited 8×
The court held that summary dismissal of a habeas corpus petition followed by a grant of a certificate of probable cause is intrinsically contradictory and warrants reversal.
-
The admission of a videotaped deposition of a burglary victim, whose unavailability was not properly established, violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, but this error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
The court held that while the police may have violated Davis's right to counsel by reinitiating interrogation, federal habeas relief was barred by Mississippi's procedural default rule. The court also found no constitutional violation regarding prosecutorial comments or the speed
-
The court held that the Sentencing Reform Act's new parole guidelines do not apply to prisoners who will be on parole or release supervision at the expiration of the five-year transition period.
-
851 F.2d 784·
5th Cir.·
1988-08-12
·cited 8×
A federal court may not grant habeas relief for denials of due process or ineffective assistance of counsel unless the petitioner demonstrates prejudice, meaning a reasonable probability that the outcome would have been different.
-
851 F.2d 1115·
8th Cir.·
1988-07-15
·cited 8×
The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas petition regarding issues raised below, but dismissed without prejudice the issues raised for the first time on appeal.
-
851 F.2d 34·
2d Cir.·
1988-06-22
·cited 8×
A federal habeas court should presume that a defendant was informed by his attorney of the elements of the crime charged when the defendant indicates this during the plea proceeding and offers no contrary evidence.
-
The court held that the identification procedure was unnecessarily suggestive and unreliable, violating due process, and affirmed the district court's grant of habeas corpus relief.
-
Federal habeas relief is not available for newly discovered evidence that only goes to guilt or innocence, and ineffective assistance of counsel claims require showing deficient performance and prejudice.
-
848 F.2d 1312·
2d Cir.·
1988-05-20
·cited 8×
The court held that the State's suppression of material exculpatory evidence concerning Robert Lupinacci violated Miller's due process rights under Brady v. Maryland, requiring that the writ of habeas corpus be granted.
-
846 F.2d 1286·
11th Cir.·
1988-05-18
·cited 8×
The court held that the petitioner's claim that he proceeded pro se without a knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel is not frivolous and warrants further review.
-
The court held that a defendant's prior invocation of the right to counsel on one charge does not bar police from initiating interrogation on a different, uncharged offense, provided Miranda warnings are given and the right is voluntarily waived.
-
A district court must review the entire state court record to determine if a constitutional error in jury instructions was harmless, and has a duty to obtain the record if not provided by the parties.
-
The court held that the preclusion of defense expert testimony was a constitutionally permissible sanction for a deliberate and prejudicial discovery violation, even if less severe sanctions were theoretically available.
-
842 F.2d 184·
7th Cir.·
1988-03-16
·cited 8×
The court held that the district court properly granted the writ of habeas corpus because the state court's finding of no bona fide doubt as to the petitioner's competence was not supported by the record.
-
838 F.2d 792·
5th Cir.·
1988-03-03
·cited 8×
The court held that the defendant's plea of 'true' to prior convictions for sentence enhancement was voluntary and intelligent under the totality of the circumstances.
-
839 F.2d 1030·
4th Cir.·
1988-02-23
·cited 8×
The court held that a federal habeas petitioner must exhaust state remedies, and new evidence presented in federal court may require the state courts to re-evaluate the claim's procedural posture and merits.
-
837 F.2d 802·
8th Cir.·
1988-01-25
·cited 8×
-
838 F.2d 41·
2d Cir.·
1988-01-25
·cited 8×
The court held that a federal prisoner paroled to the physical custody of state authorities under 28 C.F.R. § 2.32(a)(1) is considered paroled, and the Parole Commission may deny credit for time served in state prison if the parolee commits a new offense.
-
The court affirmed the district court's finding of a Pate violation, holding that the state trial court erred by failing to inquire into the defendant's competency to stand trial.
-
835 F.2d 947·
1st Cir.·
1987-12-30
·cited 8×
The court held that the victim's false statement about her pregnancy, even if considered perjury, did not constitute a constitutional violation affecting the outcome of the trial because the government was unaware of the falsity and the information was irrelevant to the rape char
-
834 F.2d 461·
5th Cir.·
1987-12-21
·cited 8×
The court held that the state's failure to disclose witness hypnosis did not violate Brady, the exclusion of impeachment testimony was not fundamentally unfair, and the admission of bail hearing testimony was harmless error.
-
835 F.2d 185·
8th Cir.·
1987-12-10
·cited 8×
The court held that a motion challenging the execution of a sentence is not cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and a habeas corpus petition requires proper venue. However, a challenge to the validity of a sentence is cognizable under § 2255.
-
The court held that the California Supreme Court's refusal to apply its new felony murder rule retroactively to the petitioner's case did not violate the federal Constitution's due process or equal protection clauses.
-
832 F.2d 476·
9th Cir.·
1987-11-09
·cited 8×
The Arizona Supreme Court's construction of A.R.S. § 13-703(F)(6) to find aggravating circumstances was not unconstitutional, and federal courts should apply a deferential standard of review to such findings.
-
831 F.2d 493·
4th Cir.·
1987-10-16
·cited 8×
The majority decision improperly overruled prior panel precedent (Adkins) by disregarding established principles of federal collateral review and habeas corpus jurisprudence.
-
824 F.2d 1551·
11th Cir.·
1987-08-21
·cited 8×
The court held that the inmate's claims of procedural due process, Eighth Amendment, substantive due process, and equal protection violations were without merit, emphasizing deference to prison administrators' decisions.
-
827 F.2d 52·
7th Cir.·
1987-08-05
·cited 8×
The court held that the witness's in-court identification was not unduly suggestive and was sufficiently reliable, and that the refusal to allow cross-examination on co-defendants' dispositions did not deny a fair trial.
-
822 F.2d 556·
5th Cir.·
1987-07-28
·cited 8×
The court held that the Parole Commission's application of updated guidelines did not violate the ex post facto clause, its severity classification was proper, and the disparate treatment of a codefendant did not violate due process.
-
The court held that a pro se petitioner's belated appeal is precluded by strict appellate rules regarding timely notice of appeal and the effect of post-judgment motions.
-
509 So. 2d 391·
Fla. 1st DCA·
1987-07-07
·cited 8×
Michael Thompson, a Florida State Prison inmate, challenged the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging his placement on Close Management Status. The court reversed, finding that Thompson did not receive adequate notice of the charges against him as required by Florida A
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to present substantial facts to doubt his competency, and therefore, the restoration hearing procedures were adequate and the conviction stands.
-
820 F.2d 654·
4th Cir.·
1987-06-08
·cited 8×
The court held that breaks in custody, changes in interrogation location and interrogators, and proper Miranda warnings vitiated an initial violation of the Edwards rule, and that subsequent confessions were voluntary.
-
The court held that the trial court's alleged errors in failing to reread testimony, prosecutorial misconduct during closing arguments, and failure to disclose a witness statement did not rise to the level of constitutional violations sufficient to grant habeas corpus relief.
-
818 F.2d 746·
11th Cir.·
1987-05-14
·cited 8×
The court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus and the motion for stay of execution, finding that claims were either an abuse of the writ or without merit.
-
The court held that the petitioner has not exhausted his state court remedies because claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, particularly those involving facts outside the trial record, can still be raised in Illinois post-conviction proceedings.
-
819 F.2d 1425·
8th Cir.·
1987-05-06
·cited 8×
The court held that admitting the victim's posthypnotic identification testimony violated the petitioner's due process rights because the hypnosis procedure lacked essential safeguards and corroboration, rendering the identification unreliable.
-
The Constitution does not require a final revocation hearing if parole revocation is mandatory by law due to a felony conviction.
-
The court held that challenges to jury instructions were procedurally barred due to a state procedural default, and direct challenges to the Illinois Guilty But Mentally Ill (GBMI) statutes were without merit.
-
The court held that the Parole Commission has the authority to reconsider a parole decision based on information previously overlooked or not adequately addressed, even if that information is not strictly 'new,' and affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief.
-
The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas petition, holding that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review discretionary decisions of the Parole Commission, and that the petitioner's due process claims lacked a legal basis.
-
The court held that the trial court's jury instruction on 'provoking the difficulty' was proper under Texas law, and the admission of 'have you heard' questions about prior arrests was harmless error, thus affirming the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.
-
812 F.2d 1517·
6th Cir.·
1987-03-05
·cited 8×
The court held that time spent on bond, even with personal difficulties, does not qualify for sentence credit under 18 U.S.C. § 3568 unless the conditions were tantamount to incarceration.
-
811 F.2d 322·
6th Cir.·
1987-02-13
·cited 8×
A habeas petitioner must fairly present the substance of a federal claim, including the legal theory, to the state courts to satisfy the exhaustion requirement.
-
808 F.2d 1303·
8th Cir.·
1987-01-13
·cited 8×
The court held that a guilty plea waives independent claims of constitutional violations and extradition defects, and that a minor technical error in lodging a detainer does not invalidate it.
-
The court held that the district court correctly treated the suit as a habeas corpus petition but erred in dismissing it; the case should be dismissed without prejudice to allow pursuit of state remedies.
-
The court held that the petitioner's free exercise and equal protection claims regarding marijuana possession for religious use were without merit.
-
The court held that denying suppression of an inculpatory statement implicitly ruled it voluntary, and that the failure to submit the voluntariness issue to the jury was not a constitutional error requiring reversal. The court also found no violation of the right to counsel.
-
The court should afford Hall an evidentiary hearing on his claim of newly discovered evidence.
-
The court held that Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 23(a) requires only a deferential review of the Attorney General's determination of need for a prisoner transfer pending habeas corpus appeal, limited to ensuring the court's ability to adjudicate the case effectively.