Presumption Of Correctness Of State Court Findings

674 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 230 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Bowen v. Maynard
  799 F.2d 593· 10th Cir.· 1986-06-25 ·cited 24×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The court held that the State violated due process by failing to disclose exculpatory evidence material to the defense, requiring the convictions to be set aside.
• United States ex rel. Lawrence Smith v. Fairman
  769 F.2d 386· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-22 ·cited 24×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The State's failure to disclose a police firearms worksheet indicating the gun was inoperable violated Brady v. Maryland, entitling the petitioner to habeas corpus relief.
• Antone v. Strickland
  706 F.2d 1534· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-13 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding petitioner's claims without merit, but remanded to the district court to consider the effects of a pending Supreme Court decision.
• Daniels v. Maggio
  669 F.2d 1075· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-12 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate prejudice from alleged trial counsel errors, and therefore, his petition for habeas corpus relief was correctly denied.
• Drake v. Wyrick
  640 F.2d 912· 8th Cir.· 1981-02-18 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief, finding that the petitioner's claims of newly discovered evidence, ineffective assistance of counsel, and a chilled right to testify were without merit or unexhausted.
• Farmer v. Caldwell
  476 F.2d 22· 5th Cir.· 1973-03-23 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying habeas corpus relief, as the petitioner's guilty pleas were voluntary and knowingly entered, and the state court proceedings were adequate.
• Smith v. Zant
  887 F.2d 1407· 11th Cir.· 1989-09-29 ·cited 23×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
• Evans v. O.L. McCOTTER
  805 F.2d 1210· 5th Cir.· 1986-12-03 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the defendant's claims of present insanity and discriminatory application of the death penalty statute were insufficient to warrant a certificate of probable cause or a stay of execution.
• Grantling v. Balkcom
  632 F.2d 1261· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-17 ·cited 23×·via Presumption Of Correctness Of State Court Factual Determinations
  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.
• Towne v. Dugger
  899 F.2d 1104· 11th Cir.· 1990-04-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a suspect's question to an officer about whether he should get a lawyer constitutes an equivocal request for counsel, requiring further questioning to cease until the request is clarified.
• Mercer v. Armontrout
  844 F.2d 582· 8th Cir.· 1988-04-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the jury's finding of agency as an aggravating factor was permissible and that even if one aggravating factor was invalid, the death sentence could still stand. The court also found no constitutional error in the jury selection or the admission of evidence of
• Felde v. Blackburn
  795 F.2d 400· 5th Cir.· 1986-07-21 ·cited 22×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The court held that the record was insufficient to determine if the state court's finding of competency was supported, requiring a remand for further proceedings. Other claims were rejected.
• Young v. Herring
  777 F.2d 198· 5th Cir.· 1985-11-26 ·cited 22×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The court held that the defendant's procedural default in failing to raise a timely objection to the identification testimony under Mississippi law barred federal habeas review, and that the evidence was otherwise sufficient to support the conviction.
• Sandstrom v. Butterworth
  738 F.2d 1200· 11th Cir.· 1984-08-13 ·cited 22×
  The majority found that Sandstrom's federal constitutional claim regarding judicial disqualification was exhausted in state courts, but the dissenting judge disagreed.
• Pryor v. Rose
  724 F.2d 525· 6th Cir.· 1984-01-06 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a jury instruction referencing felony murder for explanatory purposes, without directing the jury to consider it as a basis for conviction, did not amend the indictment and therefore did not raise a double jeopardy issue.
• United States ex rel. Clarence Rivers v. Franzen
  692 F.2d 491· 7th Cir.· 1982-11-10 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the post-trial evidence of the petitioner's alleged incompetency did not retroactively render his trial unfair, and thus, the trial court was not constitutionally required to hold a post-trial competency hearing.
• Ardia v. McCREE
  689 F.2d 797· 8th Cir.· 1982-10-08 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the petitioner's video-taped statement was admissible because he initiated further communication with the police after invoking his right to counsel and knowingly and intelligently waived that right.
• Tyler v. Swenson
  427 F.2d 412· 8th Cir.· 1970-06-12 ·cited 22×
  A state court evidentiary hearing is not fair when the judge who presided over the original plea also acts as the trier of fact, relying on his own recollection of events that are disputed by the petitioner and cannot be cross-examined.
• Satchell v. Cardwell
  653 F.2d 408· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-10 ·cited 21×·via Deference To State Court Findings
  The court held that the petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel was not violated by his attorney's failure to file a motion to suppress evidence, as the attorney's actions were within the bounds of reasonably competent representation and the entry wa
• Germany v. Estelle
  639 F.2d 1301· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-19 ·cited 21×
  The admission of Germany's incriminating statement was harmless error, and the state court's factual findings regarding the compulsory process claim are presumed correct under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).
• Barnard v. Collins
  958 F.2d 634· 5th Cir.· 1992-04-03 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the Texas capital sentencing statute, as applied, did not unconstitutionally prevent the jury from considering mitigating evidence, and that Barnard's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel lacked merit.
• McCALL v. Dutton
  863 F.2d 454· 6th Cir.· 1988-12-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because there was no evidence of coercive police activity, which is a necessary predicate for finding a confession involuntary under the Due Process Clause.
• Hawkins v. Lynaugh
  844 F.2d 1132· 5th Cir.· 1988-04-29 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendant's confession was voluntary and the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction, affirming the denial of federal habeas relief.
• Neron v. Tierney
  841 F.2d 1197· 1st Cir.· 1988-03-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the state courts' refusal to interview a juror, based on a weak showing of potential bias, did not violate due process, and thus federal habeas relief was inappropriate.
• Clark Jerome McMILLAN v. Barksdale
  823 F.2d 981· 6th Cir.· 1987-07-21 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a pro se prisoner's motion for a certificate of probable cause can serve as a timely notice of appeal, and that the district court did not err in refusing to hold an evidentiary hearing when state court findings were not impeached.
• van Pilon v. Amos Reed
  799 F.2d 1332· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-16 ·cited 20×
  A district court's issuance of a limited certificate of probable cause does not restrict the appellate court's review to only those issues stated in the certificate. The appellate court must address all issues raised by the petitioner.
• Sampley v. Attorney General OF North Carolina
  786 F.2d 610· 4th Cir.· 1986-03-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a state trial court's denial of a continuance, which resulted in the defendant proceeding to trial without counsel, did not violate the Sixth Amendment because the defendant failed to demonstrate a lack of fair opportunity to secure counsel and the denial was
• Sterling Rault, Sr. v. State OF La.
  772 F.2d 117· 5th Cir.· 1985-09-13 ·cited 20×
  The court denied the application for a certificate of probable cause, finding the petitioner failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right.
• United States ex rel. Alonzo Howard Jones v. DeROBERTIS
  766 F.2d 270· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-17 ·cited 20×·via Deference To State Court Findings
  The court held that the state courts' rejection of the defendant's claims regarding false testimony and Brady violations was entitled to deference, and that the defendant's other claims lacked merit or were procedurally barred.
• United States ex rel. Steven Grundset v. Franzen
  675 F.2d 870· 7th Cir.· 1982-04-13 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment for the petitioner, as the state record, despite the lack of a verbatim transcript, sufficiently demonstrated the voluntary and knowing waiver of constitutional rights.
• Stumes v. Solem
  671 F.2d 1150· 8th Cir.· 1982-03-01 ·cited 20×
  The dissenting judge holds that the defendant's statements were voluntary and admissible, distinguishing the case from Edwards v. Arizona.
• Trahan v. Estelle
  544 F.2d 1305· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-10 ·cited 20×
  A guilty plea, entered with advice of counsel, breaks the chain of prior constitutional violations, and federal habeas relief is limited to the voluntariness and knowing character of the plea itself.
• Brown v. Crouse
  399 F.2d 311· 10th Cir.· 1968-07-26 ·cited 20×
  Federal courts cannot summarily dismiss state prisoner habeas corpus petitions based solely on state court findings without an evidentiary hearing if material issues of fact are raised.
• Cook v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n
  749 F.2d 678· 11th Cir.· 1985-01-02 ·cited 19×
  The court held that while state delays can excuse the exhaustion requirement, the circumstances here do not warrant excusing it, but the district court should allow the petitioner to choose whether to proceed in state court without his presence.
• Cornell Jackson v. Wyrick
  730 F.2d 1177· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-29 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the repeated interrogations of the petitioner did not violate his Miranda rights because the police scrupulously honored his right to cut off questioning.
• Young v. Herring
  938 F.2d 543· 5th Cir.· 1991-07-26 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, finding that the petitioner's claims regarding ex parte jury communication, prosecutorial misconduct, and ineffective assistance of counsel were without merit or based on frivolous allegations.
• Schlup v. Armontrout
  941 F.2d 631· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err in barring claims not raised in state court or in denying Schlup's remaining claim on its merits, and that an evidentiary hearing was not required.
• Nieto v. Sullivan
  879 F.2d 743· 10th Cir.· 1989-06-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner was not denied a fair trial or a public trial, and affirmed the district court's denial of the writ of habeas corpus.
• Young v. Lynaugh
  821 F.2d 1133· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-20 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court properly entertained the habeas petition but must reconsider the substantive claims, vacating the judgment and remanding for further proceedings.
• Holland v. Attorney General of New Jersey
  777 F.2d 150· 3d Cir.· 1985-11-22 ·cited 18×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The admission of a co-defendant's confession implicating the defendant, even if deemed harmless error by state courts, violates the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause and requires reversal unless the prosecution proves harmlessness beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Miller v. Fenton
  741 F.2d 1456· 3d Cir.· 1984-08-17 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the majority erred in treating the voluntariness of a confession as a question of fact, thereby deferring to state court findings, when Supreme Court precedent establishes it as a mixed question of law and fact requiring independent federal review.
• Carzell Moore v. Zant
  722 F.2d 640· 11th Cir.· 1983-12-20 ·cited 18×
  The court did not issue a holding in this excerpt, as it is a concurring and dissenting opinion and an order for rehearing en banc.
• Dunn v. Maggio
  712 F.2d 998· 5th Cir.· 1983-08-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner's guilty plea was knowing and voluntary, and the repeal of a statute concerning sentence commutation did not violate the ex post facto clause.
• Plunkett v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  709 F.2d 1004· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-22 ·cited 18×·via Deference To State Court Findings
  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.
• Tifford v. Louie L. Wainwright
  592 F.2d 233· 5th Cir.· 1979-03-28 ·cited 18×·via Presumption Of Correctness Of State Court Factual Determinations
  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
• Williams v. Lou V. Brewer
  509 F.2d 227· 8th Cir.· 1974-12-31 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge holds that the defendant voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to counsel and right to remain silent, and his statements were not involuntary.
• United States ex rel. Stephen J. B. v. Shelly
  430 F.2d 215· 2d Cir.· 1970-06-30 ·cited 18×·via Presumption Of Correctness Of State Court Factual Determinations
• MAY v. Collins
  955 F.2d 299· 5th Cir.· 1992-02-26 ·cited 17×
  The court granted the certificate of probable cause to appeal, finding the issue debatable among jurists of reason, but ultimately affirmed the district court's denial of the writ, holding the state court's 'paper hearing' was adequate for § 2254(d) presumption of correctness.
• Jang Han BAE v. Peters
  950 F.2d 469· 7th Cir.· 1991-12-09 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied Bae's habeas corpus petition, affirming the state court's admission of his confession and rejection of his ineffective assistance of counsel claims.
• Bassette v. Thompson
  915 F.2d 932· 4th Cir.· 1990-10-05 ·cited 17×
  The court held that most of the petitioner's claims were procedurally barred under Teague v. Lane and state law, and the remaining claims lacked merit.