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 affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding the Fourth Amendment claim precluded and the identification issue unexhausted in state courts.
-
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that the petitioner's confession was voluntary and not obtained in violation of his Fifth or Sixth Amendment rights.
-
580 F.2d 112·
4th Cir.·
1978-07-06
·cited 8×
-
572 F.2d 1379·
9th Cir.·
1978-04-11
·cited 8×
The escape of a youth offender tolls their Youth Corrections Act sentence, and applying a regulation clarifying this does not violate the ex post facto clause.
-
The court held that a prosecutor's unanswered question on cross-examination, asking if the defendant had previously told his trial story, did not violate the Fifth Amendment by commenting on the defendant's silence.
-
565 F.2d 1254·
2d Cir.·
1977-11-21
·cited 8×
The court held that the district court erred in sua sponte dismissing the habeas corpus petition without requiring an answer or conducting a hearing, as the petitioner raised substantial claims regarding denial of representation and due process.
-
561 F.2d 1200·
5th Cir.·
1977-10-27
·cited 8×
The appellate court's decision to grant rehearing and affirm the conviction is upheld, and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed.
-
566 F.2d 381·
2d Cir.·
1977-09-30
·cited 8×
The New York first degree robbery statute, which places the burden of proving an affirmative defense on the defendant, is constitutional under the Supreme Court's decision in Patterson v. New York.
-
560 F.2d 942·
8th Cir.·
1977-08-17
·cited 8×
The court held that the Navy's denial of the exemption was within its discretion and not arbitrary, irrational, or a due process violation, as the military's need for physicians is a matter for military determination.
-
349 So. 2d 696·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1977-08-15
·cited 8×
The Florida District Court of Appeal held that a trial court lacks jurisdiction to modify a probation order while a judgment of conviction and probation order is pending on appeal. The court granted a writ of habeas corpus to release petitioners from unlawful custody based on an
-
556 F.2d 1326·
5th Cir.·
1977-08-05
·cited 8×
The court held that the petitioner did not have a constitutional right to counsel at his 1960 probation revocation hearing, and his failure to object to the use of that conviction for sentence enhancement waives federal habeas corpus review.
-
The court held that a federal district court errs in denying a habeas corpus petition without reviewing the state trial court transcript, relying solely on a state appellate court's summary.
-
A state prisoner who has had a full and fair opportunity to litigate his Fourth Amendment claim in state court cannot obtain federal habeas corpus relief on that claim.
-
556 F.2d 880·
8th Cir.·
1977-06-09
·cited 8×
The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction because the petitioner's challenge concerned the manner of sentence execution, not the sentence itself, and the custodian was not within the court's territorial jurisdiction.
-
555 F.2d 137·
6th Cir.·
1977-05-20
·cited 8×
A parolee is entitled to a revocation hearing to present mitigating circumstances, even if convicted of a new felony, to satisfy due process requirements.
-
A parole revocation hearing is not constitutionally required until the parole violator has completed serving an intervening sentence.
-
A criminal sentence conditioned on immediate payment of a fine, which the defendant later cannot pay due to circumstances arising after the plea, is unconstitutional if it results in imprisonment.
-
A guilty plea does not bar federal habeas corpus relief when the petitioner has used available state habeas corpus proceedings to challenge the constitutionality of the statute under which they were convicted.
-
The court held that the double jeopardy clause, as interpreted in Breed v. Jones, applies retroactively to a 1973 conviction where the appellant was adjudicated delinquent for the same offense prior to his criminal conviction.
-
The court held that the district court erred in its determination regarding the Interstate Agreement on Detainers and ordered a remand for further proceedings.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claim, even if based on a retroactive change in law, must first be presented to state courts for exhaustion of remedies.
-
546 F.2d 829·
9th Cir.·
1976-12-03
·cited 8×
The court held that a retrial is barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause because the mistrial was declared without a finding of manifest necessity or consideration of alternatives.
-
545 F.2d 21·
7th Cir.·
1976-11-17
·cited 8×
The court held that a defendant's election to proceed to trial with unprepared counsel, when that election is a product of the state's inexcusable delay in indictment and appointment of counsel, does not constitute a waiver of the right to effective assistance of counsel.
-
A petitioner is not entitled to habeas corpus relief for a warrant defect if the error was not prejudicial.
-
The court held that the failure to disclose a police report containing the victim's initial doubt about the assailant's identity constituted a Brady violation, entitling the petitioner to habeas corpus relief.
-
The court held that the Governor's commutation of a death sentence to 99 years imprisonment, even if it deprived the petitioner of a state law right to jury resentencing, did not present a federal constitutional question cognizable in habeas corpus.
-
The court held that the denial of habeas corpus relief was proper because the appellant's claims did not present constitutional violations and any procedural defaults were waived.
-
538 F.2d 1272·
7th Cir.·
1976-07-28
·cited 8×
The court held that the knowing use of perjured testimony regarding plea agreements, which was emphasized by the prosecution, abridged the petitioner's due process rights concerning his murder conviction.
-
538 F.2d 1327·
8th Cir.·
1976-07-20
·cited 8×
The court held that a Rule 60(b) motion cannot serve as a substitute for a timely appeal from the original judgment.
-
536 F.2d 1199·
7th Cir.·
1976-06-30
·cited 8×
The court held that claims challenging the fact or duration of confinement, including the deprivation of good time credits, are not moot and should be considered via habeas corpus, even if the prisoner has been transferred. Claims for injunctive relief against future punishment a
-
535 F.2d 361·
7th Cir.·
1976-05-05
·cited 8×
The court held that the arresting officers had probable cause to arrest the petitioner based on witness descriptions and the arresting officer's personal knowledge of the neighborhood and its inhabitants. The court also held that the state trial court adequately determined the vo
-
The court held that the use of an unconstitutionally obtained probation revocation at the punishment stage of a trial, to argue for a longer sentence, violates due process and equal protection.
-
532 F.2d 1288·
9th Cir.·
1976-03-24
·cited 8×
The court held that the petitioner failed to meet his burden of proof to show his guilty plea was not voluntary or knowingly made, despite a thirty-year delay in challenging it.
-
529 F.2d 932·
9th Cir.·
1976-01-28
·cited 8×
A state prisoner's admission of prior felony convictions, which is the functional equivalent of a guilty plea under federal constitutional law, requires admonishment of consequences regardless of state court characterization or prospective application dates.
-
525 F.2d 660·
5th Cir.·
1975-12-31
·cited 8×
The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the habeas corpus petition without a hearing because the petition failed to allege facts sufficient to show the Board's action was arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.
-
The court held that the state's denial of a transcript of a prior federal trial for the same offense to an indigent defendant was a constitutional error that could not be deemed harmless.
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting habeas corpus relief because the Immigration and Naturalization Service failed to provide reasons for denying the appellees' extension of voluntary departure.
-
523 F.2d 825·
7th Cir.·
1975-10-09
·cited 8×
Due process does not require a rehearing after a prisoner receives written reasons for parole denial, and the Parole Board did not breach its statutory duty by continuing the prisoner to expiration of his sentence.
-
The court held that the failure of retained counsel to perfect a direct appeal, without state involvement, does not constitute a Fourteenth Amendment violation.
-
The federal district court did not err in denying the habeas petition without an independent evidentiary hearing, as the state habeas hearing was full and fair.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a prima facie case for denial of his speedy trial right, as he did not affirmatively assert this right during the twenty-six month delay between indictment and trial, and the record did not support claims of prejudice.
-
The court held that while a prisoner's claim for release must be brought as a habeas corpus petition, a claim for damages and injunctive relief for inadequate medical care can be brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, but in this case, the alleged inadequate care did not rise to a const
-
515 F.2d 129·
1st Cir.·
1975-05-13
·cited 8×
Habeas corpus relief is not available for disputes concerning parental custody of children ordered by a state probate court.
-
-
514 F.2d 570·
6th Cir.·
1975-04-04
·cited 8×
The court held that the Tennessee statute criminalizing "crimes against nature" was unconstitutionally vague as applied to cunnilingus because prior Tennessee case law had not clearly established this act as proscribed by the statute, failing to provide fair notice.
-
508 F.2d 849·
5th Cir.·
1975-02-27
·cited 8×
The court held that a state prisoner seeking federal habeas corpus relief based on jury composition claims is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on the issue of 'cause' for any procedural default in raising the claim, even if the state has a rule similar to Davis v. United States
-
The court held that a pro se habeas corpus petition alleging systematic exclusion of Negroes from grand and petit juries, even if crude, is sufficient to invoke federal jurisdiction and warrants further proceedings.
-
510 F.2d 264·
8th Cir.·
1975-01-28
·cited 8×
The court held that the district court properly denied the habeas corpus petition because the arresting officers had probable cause to arrest the petitioner. The court also held that the district court did not err in refusing to admit the entire state trial transcript into eviden
-
A new penal code with different sentencing does not entitle a prisoner to release if a saving clause preserves prior convictions and sentences.
-
505 F.2d 116·
5th Cir.·
1974-12-13
·cited 8×
The court held that a prior probated felony conviction is admissible at the penalty stage of a bifurcated trial to show a defendant's criminal record, even if probation was revoked.