-
728 F.2d 1533·
8th Cir.·
1984-03-05
·cited 59×
The court held that the admission of the victim's identification of Graham violated his due process rights due to impermissibly suggestive identification procedures that created a substantial likelihood of misidentification.
-
446 So. 2d 1059·
Fla.·
1984-02-02
·cited 58×
Leslie Jones, under a death sentence, appeals the trial court's denial of his Rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief and motion to disqualify the trial judge. The Florida Supreme Court affirms both denials, holding that the trial judge's comments and compensation decisions d
-
723 F.2d 1077·
3d Cir.·
1983-12-08
·cited 54×
-
658 F.2d 337·
5th Cir.·
1981-10-05
·cited 49×
The admission of irrelevant and prejudicial evidence of a prior conviction, due to the denial of a severance motion, violated the petitioner's Fourteenth Amendment right to a fair trial, warranting habeas corpus relief.
-
682 F.2d 154·
8th Cir.·
1982-04-23
·cited 30×
A defendant's waiver of counsel for a polygraph examination does not extend to subsequent post-test interrogation, and the government must prove a knowing and intelligent waiver for such interrogation.
-
710 F.3d 1241·
11th Cir.·
2013-02-27
·cited 28×
The Court of Criminal Appeals' decision did not adjudicate a federal constitutional claim on the merits, but rather a state law claim arising from its application of the plain error doctrine. Therefore, federal habeas relief under AEDPA is not warranted.
-
632 F.2d 1261·
5th Cir.·
1980-12-17
·cited 23×
The court held that a voluntary and intelligent guilty plea breaks the chain of prior constitutional claims, and therefore, the denial of habeas corpus relief was proper.
-
709 F.2d 1004·
5th Cir.·
1983-07-22
·cited 18×
The majority erred by failing to give sufficient deference to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals' findings regarding the jury charge and prosecutor's argument.
-
592 F.2d 233·
5th Cir.·
1979-03-28
·cited 18×
The court held that the State's new argument, raised for the first time on rehearing, would not be considered because it was not timely raised and lacked substantial justice. Furthermore, even if considered, the argument would fail as the state court's factual determination was n
-
430 F.2d 215·
2d Cir.·
1970-06-30
·cited 18×
-
804 F.2d 893·
6th Cir.·
1986-10-27
·cited 17×
The court held that the state's identification procedures did not violate due process, as the trial court's factual determination of reliability was entitled to a presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).
-
701 F.2d 1228·
7th Cir.·
1983-03-09
·cited 16×
The court held that the Jackson v. Virginia standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence under due process does not apply to affirmative defenses like insanity, even if state law places the burden of proof on the prosecution.
-
683 F.2d 983·
6th Cir.·
1982-07-20
·cited 16×
The majority opinion orders a remand for a new evidentiary hearing to determine the voluntariness of statements made by petitioners after arrest, finding the state court's factual determination on voluntariness was not entitled to the presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. §
-
679 F.2d 1209·
6th Cir.·
1982-06-03
·cited 14×
The court held that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, entitling the petitioner to habeas corpus relief.
-
926 F.2d 694·
7th Cir.·
1991-03-08
·cited 12×
The court held that defense counsel's failure to ensure an alibi witness's appearance at trial, despite diligent efforts to locate her, did not constitute constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel.
-
802 F.2d 34·
2d Cir.·
1986-09-25
·cited 12×
The court held that the district court erred in finding the pretrial identification procedures impermissibly suggestive, and therefore reversed the grant of the writ of habeas corpus.
-
666 F.2d 1338·
10th Cir.·
1981-12-15
·cited 10×
The federal court held that the state court's determination that the confession was voluntary was supported by the record and should not have been overturned.
-
941 F.3d 452·
11th Cir.·
2019-10-17
·cited 8×
Jefferson was convicted of felony murder in 1986 and sentenced to death by a Georgia jury, but on federal habeas review, the Eleventh Circuit found that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance during sentencing by failing to investigate his traumatic childhood head inju
-
890 F.2d 1105·
10th Cir.·
1989-11-30
·cited 8×
The court held that the trial court improperly violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a public trial by excluding the public during a witness's testimony without adequate findings or consideration of alternatives.
-
843 F.2d 1240·
9th Cir.·
1988-04-08
·cited 8×
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.
-
11th Cir.·
2010-05-24
·cited 6×
The Court of Appeals did not err in its application of 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) and the issue decided by the Supreme Court was not raised by the parties below.
-
922 F.2d 390·
7th Cir.·
1991-01-08
·cited 6×
The admission of the victim's statements, identified as 'Little Gage,' did not violate the Confrontation Clause because they qualified as excited utterances and a dying declaration, which are firmly rooted hearsay exceptions.
-
401 F.2d 125·
7th Cir.·
1968-09-20
·cited 6×
The court affirmed the district court's denial of the writ of habeas corpus, holding that federal courts should defer to state court decisions on the merits when federal standards have been met.
-
621 F. Supp. 2d 1249·
M.D. Fla.·
2008-11-14
·cited 4×
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the state court's denial of his claims was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, or based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
371 F. Supp. 2d 1326·
M.D. Fla.·
2005-01-26
·cited 4×
The Florida Parole Commission violated Petitioner's due process rights by disregarding a hearing examiner's factual findings and substituting its own in revoking his control release.
-
412 F.2d 230·
9th Cir.·
1969-05-27
·cited 3×
-
886 F.2d 1016·
8th Cir.·
1989-09-26
·cited 2×
The court held that the suspect's confession was not the product of interrogation requiring full Miranda warnings because he initiated the conversation and the statements were volunteered.
-
2020 WL 2188675·
M.D. Fla.·
2020-05-20
·cited 1×
James Matthew Menard, a Florida prisoner convicted of aggravated battery, armed trespass, and third-degree felony murder, sought federal habeas relief challenging his convictions and sentences on multiple grounds, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and sentenci
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-06-04
The court held that the state court's rejection of the petitioner's double jeopardy claim was reasonable and not contrary to federal law.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-04-11
The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally barred or failed to meet the Strickland standard for ineffective assistance of counsel, and thus federal habeas relief was denied.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-03-10
The court held that the applicant failed to show that the state court's denial of his ineffective assistance of counsel claims was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-02-18
The court held that the petitioner's claims were unexhausted, procedurally barred, or meritless, and thus denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2025-01-09
The court held that defects in state collateral proceedings are not cognizable for federal habeas relief, a plea agreement including a waived minimum mandatory sentence is permissible under Florida law, and a claim not raised in state court is procedurally barred unless specific
-
N.D. Fla.·
2024-09-16
The court held that the petitioner failed to show the state court's decision denying his due process and double jeopardy claims was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, or based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-08-26
The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were either procedurally barred or failed on the merits, as the state court's decisions were not contrary to federal law and were based on reasonable determinations of fact.
-
N.D. Fla.·
2024-08-08
The court held that the state court's rejection of the petitioner's claims was not contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, and thus habeas relief should be denied.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-05-14
The court held that several of the applicant's claims were unexhausted and procedurally defaulted, and the actual innocence exception did not apply. The remaining claim was denied on the merits.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-04-10
The federal court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus because the state court's decision denying the ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2024-03-30
A federal court cannot grant habeas relief based on claims that turn on state law or are refuted by the record, and ineffective assistance of counsel claims require both deficient performance and prejudice.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-03-29
The court held that the state court's rejection of Spears' ineffective assistance of counsel claims was a reasonable application of federal law and supported by the record.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-03-28
The court denied the habeas petition, finding that the state court's rejection of the ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2024-03-21
Joshua Hearns sought federal habeas corpus relief challenging his conviction for conspiracy to traffic oxycodone, for which he received a 25-year sentence. The court denied his petition, finding most of his claims procedurally barred because he failed to exhaust state remedies an
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-11-21
Federal habeas relief is denied because the state court's adjudication of the ineffective assistance of counsel claims was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-09-25
A federal court rejected Jonas Tramell Griffin's habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction for robbery with a firearm and other felonies related to a 2014 Family Dollar store robbery in Florida. The court found that Griffin failed to exhaust one claim, and all remaining c
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-07-17
Javier Maldonado petitioned for federal habeas relief, challenging his state convictions for drug trafficking and possession, and alleging that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to move to suppress evidence, properly present his defense regarding constr
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-07-05
The court held that the state court's determination that trial counsel's actions constituted reasonable trial strategy was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-06-13
Timothy E. Green challenged his Duval County convictions for armed burglary with assault or battery on federal habeas review, raising seven grounds of ineffective assistance of trial counsel under the Sixth Amendment. The court denied all claims, finding that the first four chall
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-03-30
The court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel was objectively reasonable and did not violate federal law.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-03-24
Andrew Asher Walters, convicted of first-degree murder and armed robbery following a 2007 jury trial, petitioned for federal habeas corpus relief challenging his conviction on sixteen grounds, primarily alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel in violation of the Sixth Am
-
M.D. Fla.·
2023-02-21
The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the state court's decisions were contrary to or unreasonably applied federal law, or based on an unreasonable determination of facts.