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

• Deutscher v. Harol Whitley
  884 F.2d 1152· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-31 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas corpus petition and that the petitioner was deprived of effective assistance of counsel due to counsel's failure to investigate and present mitigating evidence at the penalty phase.
• Thigpen v. Cory
  804 F.2d 893· 6th Cir.· 1986-10-27 ·cited 17×·via Presumption Of Correctness Of State Court Factual Determinations
  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).
• King v. Lynaugh
  868 F.2d 1400· 5th Cir.· 1989-03-21 ·cited 16×
  The court, in a concurring opinion, expresses reservations about applying the contemporaneous objection rule to claims that have been revived by Supreme Court certiorari, suggesting that such claims should be reviewed on their merits.
• Quadrini v. Clusen
  864 F.2d 577· 7th Cir.· 1989-01-11 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the petitioner's confession was voluntary and that his Sixth Amendment right to counsel had attached but was validly waived. The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition.
• Smith v. Endell
  860 F.2d 1528· 9th Cir.· 1988-11-14 ·cited 16×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the defendant's statements did not unambiguously invoke his right to counsel, and therefore the confession should not be suppressed.
• Otto Graham v. Wilson
  828 F.2d 656· 10th Cir.· 1987-09-17 ·cited 16×
  The federal court held that while prosecutorial error occurred by using perjured testimony, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming corroborating evidence. The district court's grant of habeas corpus was therefore vacated.
• Baca v. Sullivan
  821 F.2d 1480· 10th Cir.· 1987-06-29 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the defendant failed to demonstrate constitutional errors in the photographic identification procedure, juror nondisclosure, or prosecutor's cross-examination that would warrant overturning his conviction.
• Fikri Bayramoglu v. Estelle
  806 F.2d 880· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-16 ·cited 16×·via Deference To State Court Findings
  The court held that juror misconduct and bias, while serious, were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt and did not violate the defendant's constitutional right to an impartial jury.
• Evans v. O.L. McCOTTER
  790 F.2d 1232· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-04 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to prove federal constitutional infirmities in his trial, affirming the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition.
• Matusiak v. Kelly
  786 F.2d 536· 2d Cir.· 1986-03-20 ·cited 16×·via Deference To State Court Findings
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the habeas petition because the state court's acceptance of the guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary, violating due process.
• United States v. Elrod
  782 F.2d 665· 7th Cir.· 1986-01-24 ·cited 16×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  A petitioner seeking federal habeas corpus relief cannot raise a claim that was procedurally defaulted in state court unless they demonstrate cause and prejudice, and the claim's basis must appear in the trial record to establish cause.
• Roach v. Warden Joseph Martin
  757 F.2d 1463· 4th Cir.· 1985-03-20 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding that the petitioner's claims were without merit and that the state court's factfinding procedures were adequate.
• De La Rosa v. State OF Tex.
  743 F.2d 299· 5th Cir.· 1984-10-09 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the defendant's Miranda warnings were adequately explained and that the jury deliberations, despite brief discussions of parole and a juror's personal experience, did not deprive him of a fair trial.
• Tinsley v. Purvis
  731 F.2d 791· 11th Cir.· 1984-05-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the defendant's waiver of counsel was knowing and voluntary, despite the interrogating officers not asking specific questions about his desire for counsel to be present.
• Greider v. Duckworth
  701 F.2d 1228· 7th Cir.· 1983-03-09 ·cited 16×·via Presumption Of Correctness Of State Court Factual Determinations
  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.
• Schlang v. Heard
  691 F.2d 796· 5th Cir.· 1982-11-18 ·cited 16×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness For State Court Findings
  The court held that the petitioner's claims did not raise disputed issues of material fact and affirmed the district court's dismissal, treating it as a grant of summary judgment.
• Dickerson v. Fogg
  692 F.2d 238· 2d Cir.· 1982-10-25 ·cited 16×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The court held that the circumstances of the identification were sufficiently suggestive to warrant careful consideration of reliability under established legal criteria.
• Fritz v. Spalding
  682 F.2d 782· 9th Cir.· 1982-07-27 ·cited 16×·via Deference To State Court Findings
  The court held that a defendant's motion to proceed pro se is timely if made before trial begins, unless it is shown to be a tactic to secure delay, and a federal court must grant an evidentiary hearing if material facts were not adequately developed in state court.
• Fowler v. Jago
  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. §
• Cain v. Smith
  686 F.2d 374· 6th Cir.· 1982-07-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment without an evidentiary hearing, as the fragmented record required further fact-finding on the speedy trial claim. The 11.5-month delay for a simple robbery was presumptively prejudicial.
• Hearn v. Elton Floyd James
  677 F.2d 841· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-04 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a jury instruction creating a presumption of intent, while potentially erroneous for murder, was harmless error for a voluntary manslaughter conviction because intent is not a required element. The court also held that the trial court's ruling did not improper
• Dobbert v. Strickland
  670 F.2d 938· 11th Cir.· 1982-02-25 ·cited 16×
  The court granted the petitioner's motion to stay the execution of his death sentence pending appeal.
• Camarillo v. Estelle
  670 F.2d 473· 5th Cir.· 1981-12-30 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief without an evidentiary hearing when the state disputed material facts regarding the petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
• White v. Estelle
  556 F.2d 1366· 5th Cir.· 1977-08-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a 1976 statute retroactively validated a magistrate's evidentiary hearing, and the state court's findings were not entitled to a presumption of correctness due to insufficient written indicia.
• Carlson Tanner, Jr. v. Vincent
  541 F.2d 932· 2d Cir.· 1976-08-27 ·cited 16×
  A custodial statement made after complete Miranda warnings is not rendered involuntary solely because it was preceded by an unwarned or inadequately warned statement.
• Scarborough v. Kellum
  525 F.2d 931· 5th Cir.· 1976-01-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court properly denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding no constitutional infirmity in the petitioner's conviction.
• Keiper v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  509 F.2d 238· 9th Cir.· 1975-01-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing, as the state court record adequately demonstrated the voluntariness of the appellant's statements.
• United States ex rel. Nathaniel Williams v. LaVALLEE
  487 F.2d 1006· 2d Cir.· 1973-11-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the habeas petition without a hearing, as the state court's findings did not clearly establish whether the petitioner was informed of his right to appointed appellate counsel or the 30-day time limit for appeal.
• Dempsey v. Louie L. Wainwright
  471 F.2d 604· 5th Cir.· 1973-01-08 ·cited 16×
  A federal district court is not required to hold an evidentiary hearing on a habeas corpus petition if the state court previously conducted a full and fair hearing on the issue.
• Hill v. Nelson
  466 F.2d 1346· 9th Cir.· 1972-08-29 ·cited 16×
  A federal court may not presume the correctness of state court factual findings unless they are written findings from the trial court, not merely statements in an appellate opinion.
• Heyd v. Brown
  406 F.2d 346· 5th Cir.· 1969-01-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a federal court is not required to conduct an evidentiary hearing if the state trial court provided a full and fair hearing and the record supports the federal court's findings.
• United States ex rel. Harold D. Rogers v. Richmond
  271 F.2d 364· 2d Cir.· 1959-10-28 ·cited 16×·via Deference To State Court Findings
  The dissenting judge argues that the federal court should not be bound by state court findings of fact when reviewing the voluntariness of confessions, especially given coercive police tactics.
• Collazo v. Estelle
  940 F.2d 411· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-18 ·cited 15×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The court held that the state court's denial of the writ should be affirmed, finding that the defendant initiated contact with officers and was not coerced into waiving his right to counsel.
• Lesko v. Lehman
  925 F.2d 1527· 3d Cir.· 1991-02-11 ·cited 15×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The court held that the district court erred in failing to hold an evidentiary hearing on Lesko's claim that his guilty plea was used in violation of due process, and that prosecutorial comments tainted the jury's sentencing determination.
• Sanders v. Trickey
  875 F.2d 205· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-24 ·cited 15×
  The court held that defense counsel's decisions regarding interviewing a potential witness and subpoenaing officers were strategic and did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel, nor did they prejudice the appellant.
• Williams v. Johnson
  845 F.2d 906· 11th Cir.· 1988-05-20 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the defendant's confessions were voluntary and his life sentences under the Alabama Habitual Offender Act were not disproportionate, affirming the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Bundy v. Dugger
  816 F.2d 564· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-02 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the defendant's competency to stand trial, as the defendant presented sufficient evidence to raise a legitimate doubt.
• Velarde v. Shulsen
  757 F.2d 1093· 10th Cir.· 1985-03-22 ·cited 15×
  The court held that prosecutorial cross-examination and argument regarding a defendant's post-arrest silence, when not used for impeachment of prior inconsistent statements, violates due process and is not harmless error in a case hinging on the defendant's credibility.
• In re Louie L. Wainwright
  678 F.2d 951· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-14 ·cited 15×
  The court held that a writ of prohibition is not warranted to prevent a district court from conducting an evidentiary hearing in a habeas corpus proceeding.
• Syvasky Lafayette Poyner v. Murray
  964 F.2d 1404· 4th Cir.· 1992-05-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the defendant's statement was a request for clarification, not an invocation of his right to counsel, and that even if it were, his subsequent statements reinitiated interrogation and constituted a knowing and intelligent waiver of his rights.
• Russell v. Lynaugh
  892 F.2d 1205· 5th Cir.· 1989-12-08 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, agreeing that the issue was procedurally barred and that the venireman's exclusion was proper on the merits.
• Shaddy v. Clarke
  890 F.2d 1016· 8th Cir.· 1989-11-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner's habeas corpus claim is procedurally barred due to his failure to file a timely appeal in state court, and he has not exhausted state remedies to establish cause for this default.
• Nedley G. Norman, Jr. v. Ducharme
  871 F.2d 1483· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a sentence of life without parole imposed under a statute that reserved such a penalty only for those who went to trial is unconstitutional under United States v. Jackson. The court also held that the appellant's confession was admissible.
• Thames v. Dugger
  848 F.2d 149· 11th Cir.· 1988-06-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a motion for a certificate of probable cause can constitute a timely notice of appeal and that the district court erred in denying a habeas corpus petition without an adequate record or evidentiary hearing on the ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
• Laws v. Armontrout
  834 F.2d 1401· 8th Cir.· 1987-12-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court correctly determined that appellant received ineffective assistance of counsel at the penalty phase of his trial.
• Simmons v. A.L. Lockhart
  814 F.2d 504· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-18 ·cited 14×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no error in the trial court's rulings on change of venue, juror impartiality, or discovery violations.
• Neuschafer v. McKAY
  807 F.2d 839· 9th Cir.· 1987-01-06 ·cited 14×·via Deference To State Court Findings
  The dissenting judge believes the record contains sufficient evidence for conviction and penalty, and that a remand is unnecessary.
• Riles v. O.L. McCOTTER
  799 F.2d 947· 5th Cir.· 1986-09-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right, and therefore, his motion for a certificate of probable cause and stay of execution were denied.
• Jones v. Kemp
  794 F.2d 1536· 11th Cir.· 1986-07-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the pretrial identification was not impermissibly suggestive and the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel had not attached at the time of the identification, and even if it had, the identification constituted harmless error.
• Burdette Woods v. Clusen
  794 F.2d 293· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the police tactics employed during the interrogation of a juvenile suspect violated his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights, rendering his confession involuntary.