674 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 230 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
The court held that a defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to timely file a motion for a new trial fails if the defendant initially did not wish to appeal, and that a claim of attorney's failure to investigate competency is rejected if the state cour
-
928 F.2d 288·
8th Cir.·
1991-03-20
The court held that ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel can constitute cause to lift a procedural bar, but in this case, counsel's strategic decision not to raise the rape charge issue was reasonable. The court also found the guilty pleas for rape and tampering were
-
926 F.2d 773·
8th Cir.·
1991-02-27
The court held that the district court properly denied the petition for habeas corpus relief, affirming the lower court's decision.
-
921 F.2d 214·
9th Cir.·
1990-12-12
The court held that new evidence regarding decibel levels did not prove the officers heard the defendant's requests for counsel, and thus did not render the confession involuntary. The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition.
-
915 F.2d 892·
4th Cir.·
1990-10-01
The dissenting judge believes a new trial was warranted due to insufficient inquiry into potential racial prejudice among jurors.
-
902 F.2d 9·
8th Cir.·
1990-04-26
The court held that a state court's factual findings regarding a guilty plea are presumed correct and that a habeas petitioner's claims contradicting his statements at the plea hearing are insufficient to warrant relief.
-
746 F. Supp. 1492·
N.D. Fla.·
1989-10-24
The court held that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel at the sentencing phase because his trial counsel failed to investigate and present available mitigating evidence, and this deficiency prejudiced the outcome of the sentencing proceeding.
-
848 F.2d 77·
5th Cir.·
1988-06-29
A subsequent diagnosis of mental illness does not automatically entitle a habeas petitioner to an evidentiary hearing if the record, including prior competency evaluations and the plea colloquy, does not clearly and substantially raise doubt about competency at the time of the pl
-
846 F.2d 62·
11th Cir.·
1988-05-27
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that the in-court identifications were reliable under the totality of the circumstances.
-
836 F.2d 1233·
9th Cir.·
1988-01-14
The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the habeas corpus petition, finding no denial of effective assistance of counsel, a knowing and voluntary guilty plea, and no entitlement to an evidentiary hearing.
-
831 F.2d 1280·
6th Cir.·
1987-10-28
The court held that the petitioner's claims of actual conflict of interest from joint representation, prosecutorial misconduct, and ineffective assistance of counsel did not warrant habeas corpus relief because he failed to demonstrate prejudice or constitutional violations.
-
830 F.2d 23·
3d Cir.·
1987-09-30
The court held that the trial judge's clarification of the plea bargain terms, which the defendant understood and did not object to, resolved any ambiguity and permitted the prosecutor to make a sentencing recommendation.
-
779 F.2d 578·
10th Cir.·
1986-12-16
The court held that the lack of notice to the juvenile offender's parents regarding his arrest and arraignment violates due process and renders his guilty plea involuntary, requiring the conviction to be vacated.
-
800 F.2d 502·
5th Cir.·
1986-09-26
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate a constitutional violation regarding the grand jury's fair cross-section or due process claims, affirming the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
-
787 F.2d 304·
8th Cir.·
1986-03-20
The court held that the federal district court erred by applying the presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to the state court's determination of confession voluntariness, which requires independent federal review.
-
The court held that the admission of the inculpatory statement was not a violation of the petitioner's right to counsel, and any potential error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
746 F.2d 1280-1288·
7th Cir.·
1984-10-16
The court held that the petitioner may be entitled to a writ of habeas corpus if, on remand, he can show that his trial counsel's failure to investigate the incapacitating effect of the victim's heart wound was unreasonable and that material facts were not developed due to no ine
-
738 F.2d 1087·
10th Cir.·
1984-06-26
The court held that the exclusion of the confession testimony, based on the attorney-client privilege, did not violate the defendant's constitutional rights, nor did the attorney's actions constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
-
728 F.2d 918·
7th Cir.·
1984-02-24
The court held that the petitioner's prosecution for aggravated battery after an ex parte judgment on an ordinance violation constituted double jeopardy because the offenses were the same and the ex parte judgment was criminal punishment.
-
721 F.2d 1115·
7th Cir.·
1983-11-21
The court held that trial counsel's representation fell below the minimum professional standards required by the Sixth Amendment, constituting ineffective assistance of counsel.
-
The court held that the district court correctly found ineffective assistance of counsel, as the state court's contrary findings were not supported by the record.
-
The court concurred with the majority opinion, acknowledging concerns about the Louisiana Supreme Court's interpretation of state law regarding dangerous weapons in attempted armed robbery convictions.
-
695 F.2d 1320·
11th Cir.·
1983-01-17
The court held that the district court's dismissal of the habeas petition was proper, affirming the denial of relief on both ineffective assistance of counsel and jury instruction claims.
-
The court held that the district court erred by granting habeas relief without considering the presumption of correctness afforded state court factual determinations under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).
-
685 F.2d 927·
5th Cir.·
1982-08-26
The court held that the district court properly granted habeas relief because the state's role in the disappearance of a material witness violated due process, and the state court's findings on due diligence were not entitled to deference.
-
660 F.2d 385·
8th Cir.·
1981-10-09
The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding sufficient evidence and corroboration for the conviction.
-
659 F.2d 94·
8th Cir.·
1981-09-14
The court held that the district court's dismissal of the habeas petition was proper, affirming the denial of relief on the claims of involuntary guilty plea and unconstitutional sentencing statute.
-
-
644 F.2d 573·
6th Cir.·
1981-03-16
The court held that the juvenile court's finding of probable cause, without an adjudication of delinquency, did not violate the petitioner's right against double jeopardy.
-
593 F.2d 512·
3d Cir.·
1979-02-14
The dissenting judge argues that the panel erred in finding a Sixth Amendment violation based on dual representation without requiring a showing of actual prejudice and without sufficient state action.
-
549 F.2d 1284·
9th Cir.·
1977-01-31
The court held that the district court correctly denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus because the appellant failed to establish any exceptions to the presumption of correctness for state court findings under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims are frivolous, thus denying his request for appointed counsel and dismissing the appeal.
-
498 F.2d 340·
2d Cir.·
1974-06-03
A federal court is not precluded from holding an evidentiary hearing in a habeas corpus proceeding, even if state court findings are presumed correct under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), if the state court did not make a determination after a hearing on the merits of a factual issue.
-
475 F.2d 769·
9th Cir.·
1973-03-12
The court held that the state court's finding of witness unavailability was presumptively correct and that the use of preliminary hearing testimony was permissible.
-
473 F.2d 1371·
5th Cir.·
1973-02-28
The court held that denying habeas corpus relief based solely on a factual dispute with state court findings is not error, especially when the state hearing was adequate.
-
452 F.2d 923·
9th Cir.·
1971-11-30
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, as the state court's findings regarding the understanding and voluntariness of the guilty plea were supported by the record.
-
432 F.2d 1129·
7th Cir.·
1970-09-30
The court held that the facts were not adequately developed at the state coram nobis hearing, entitling the petitioner to an evidentiary hearing in federal district court on the voluntariness of his confession.
-
The federal court correctly dismissed the habeas corpus petition without a hearing, deferring to the state court's findings.
-
397 F.2d 778·
2d Cir.·
1968-06-05
The appellate court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.
-
395 F.2d 450·
2d Cir.·
1968-05-16
The court held that the state court's denial of the appellant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea was not erroneous, and thus the federal court was not required to hold an evidentiary hearing on his habeas corpus petition.