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

• Sheik Abdel Rahim Ahmad v. Redman
  782 F.2d 409· 3d Cir.· 1986-01-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the state failed to establish a knowing and intelligent waiver of Miranda rights by the petitioner.
• Tavares v. Holbrook
  779 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1985-12-11 ·cited 14×·via Deference To State Court Findings
  The court held that the trial court's thorough investigation and finding of no jury bias, supported by juror statements, meant the defendant was not deprived of his constitutional right to a fair trial by an impartial jury.
• Garland Ray Gregory, Jr. v. Solem
  774 F.2d 309· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-02 ·cited 14×
  A federal court reviewing a state conviction via habeas corpus must afford a high measure of deference to state court factual findings, and a guilty plea is valid if it is knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, even if the defendant does not fully grasp every nuance of the law.
• United States ex rel. Jerry Devine v. Richard DeROBERTIS & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Ill.
  754 F.2d 764· 7th Cir.· 1985-02-12 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the identity of trial and appellate counsel from the same firm constitutes sufficient 'cause' to overlook a procedural default regarding an ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
• Wilson v. Hon. Robert J. Henderson
  742 F.2d 741· 2d Cir.· 1984-08-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the government informant did not elicit inculpatory statements from the appellant, and the lower courts' findings to this effect were supported by the record.
• Stacy v. Love
  679 F.2d 1209· 6th Cir.· 1982-06-03 ·cited 14×·via Presumption Of Correctness Of State Court Factual Determinations
  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.
• Lupe Hernandez Silva v. Estelle
  672 F.2d 457· 5th Cir.· 1982-04-05 ·cited 14×
  A confession obtained after a defendant invoked his right to counsel, even if readvised of his rights, is inadmissible.
• Mrs. Leo H. Hays v. Al Murphy
  663 F.2d 1004· 10th Cir.· 1981-10-26 ·cited 14×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness For State Court Findings
  The court held that the district court's finding of competency was based on inadequate evaluations, requiring reversal and remand for further proceedings.
• Bruce v. Duckworth
  659 F.2d 776· 7th Cir.· 1981-09-14 ·cited 14×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying habeas corpus relief, affirming the denial of the petitioner's claims regarding identification testimony, juror prejudice, reciprocal discovery, and double jeopardy.
• Ruiz v. Cady
  635 F.2d 584· 7th Cir.· 1980-11-07 ·cited 14×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The court held that the district court erred in denying habeas relief without independently examining the entire state court record to determine the materiality of the undisclosed witness agreement.
• Kennedy v. Fairman
  618 F.2d 1242· 7th Cir.· 1980-04-11 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a suspect's waiver of the right to remain silent, after consulting with an attorney, can constitute a knowing and voluntary waiver of the right to have counsel present during interrogation.
• Anderson v. Casscles
  531 F.2d 682· 2d Cir.· 1976-03-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while the statistical disparity of black jurors was insufficient to prove a constitutional violation, the issue of systematic exclusion of students over twenty-one from jury service was not adequately developed and required further proceedings.
• United States ex rel. Pasquale Delle Rose v. LaVALLEE
  468 F.2d 1288· 2d Cir.· 1972-10-27 ·cited 14×
  The dissenting judge would remand the case to allow the state court to clarify its factual findings regarding the voluntariness of the confessions before the federal district court holds a new evidentiary hearing.
• Hill
  440 F.2d 34· 5th Cir.· 1971-03-11 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding that the petitioner's claims were either previously adjudicated by state courts, not sufficiently prejudicial, or not properly exhausted.
• United States v. Lane
  926 F.2d 694· 7th Cir.· 1991-03-08 ·cited 12×·via Presumption Of Correctness Of State Court Factual Determinations
  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.
• Ford v. Armontrout
  916 F.2d 457· 8th Cir.· 1990-10-11 ·cited 12×·via Deference To State Court Findings
  The court held that the victim's in-court identification was reliable, evidence of other crimes was properly admitted, the speedy trial claim was procedurally barred, and counsel was not ineffective.
• Loyd v. Smith
  899 F.2d 1416· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the federal district court erred in failing to give proper deference to the state court's factual findings regarding counsel's deficient performance in a habeas corpus proceeding.
• Lavin T. Balfour v. Haws
  892 F.2d 556· 7th Cir.· 1989-12-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding competency, ineffective assistance of counsel, missing photographs, and insufficient evidence did not warrant habeas corpus relief.
• Shedelbower v. Estelle
  885 F.2d 570· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appellant's confession was not obtained in violation of his constitutional rights, as he initiated further discussion after invoking his right to counsel and validly waived those rights under the totality of the circumstances.
• Hamilton v. Vasquez
  882 F.2d 1469· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a district court must sua sponte review the state court record when a habeas petition raises mixed questions of law and fact, such as whether shackling a defendant during trial violated due process.
• Endress v. Dugger
  880 F.2d 1244· 11th Cir.· 1989-08-21 ·cited 12×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The district court properly applied the presumption of correctness to state appellate court findings and correctly concluded that the petitioner's statements were voluntary and not the product of illegal interrogation.
• Fierro v. Lynaugh
  879 F.2d 1276· 5th Cir.· 1989-08-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the petitioner's conviction and sentence were constitutional, and his claims regarding coerced confession, insufficient evidence, improper testimony, and failure to consider mitigating evidence were without merit or procedurally barred.
• McCOY v. Lynaugh
  874 F.2d 954· 5th Cir.· 1989-05-22 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the denial of a certificate of probable cause, finding no substantial issue on the merits regarding jury disqualifications.
• Fike v. James
  833 F.2d 1503· 11th Cir.· 1987-12-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the state court's finding that the petitioner initiated further communication after invoking his right to counsel is entitled to a presumption of correctness, and thus the subsequent waiver and statement were valid.
• Profitt v. Waldron
  831 F.2d 1245· 5th Cir.· 1987-10-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the petitioner's counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to adequately investigate his prior mental history, which prejudiced his defense. The court also affirmed the denial of habeas relief on the Brady and competency issues.
• LaMERE v. Risley
  827 F.2d 622· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-10 ·cited 12×
  The prosecution's failure to disclose potential rebuttal witnesses, without sufficient good cause, violated the defendant's due process rights under Montana's notice-of-alibi statute.
• Ballard v. Johnson
  821 F.2d 568· 11th Cir.· 1987-07-14 ·cited 12×
  A state court's finding that a waiver of Miranda rights preceded a confession is a historical fact entitled to a presumption of correctness in federal habeas review if supported by the record. A confession is admissible even if an attorney attempted to contact the suspect during
• Jarrett v. Headley
  802 F.2d 34· 2d Cir.· 1986-09-25 ·cited 12×·via Presumption Of Correctness Of State Court Factual Determinations
  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.
• Earnest Lee Miller v. Louie L. Wainwright
  798 F.2d 426· 11th Cir.· 1986-08-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying the wrong legal standard to petitioners' claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, denial of access to grand jury testimony, and exclusion of mitigating sentencing evidence.
• Craker v. Procunier
  756 F.2d 1212· 5th Cir.· 1985-04-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a knowing and voluntary guilty plea generally precludes a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, but remanded because the record lacked a clear finding on the plea's voluntariness.
• United States ex rel. Jose Mireles v. Greer
  736 F.2d 1160· 7th Cir.· 1984-06-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a trial judge's initial doubt about a defendant's competency to stand trial can be dissipated by subsequent evidence and reports, and the judge is not automatically required to hold a hearing if that doubt is reasonably resolved.
• Reddix v. Thigpen
  732 F.2d 494· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-21 ·cited 12×·via Deference To State Court Findings
  The court held that jury instructions potentially imputing accomplice intent to a defendant in a felony murder case, without a finding of personal intent to kill, violate Enmund v. Florida and preclude a death sentence.
• Watters v. Hubbard
  725 F.2d 381· 6th Cir.· 1984-01-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that admitting psychiatrists' testimony reciting inculpatory statements violated the defendant's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
• Daigre v. Maggio
  705 F.2d 786· 5th Cir.· 1983-05-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying an evidentiary hearing on the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and right to counsel at lineup, but affirmed the denial of the claim regarding an impermissibly suggestive lineup.
• United States v. Bengston
  702 F.2d 656· 7th Cir.· 1983-03-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the indictment was constitutionally sufficient but remanded for an evidentiary hearing on whether the attorney's motion to withdraw due to a conflict of interest was dilatory.
• Hunt v. State OF Okla.
  683 F.2d 1305· 10th Cir.· 1982-07-22 ·cited 12×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness
  The court held that while the state trial court's jury instructions on scienter were insufficient, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrated the defendant's knowledge of the film's contents, and her defense was not based on
• United States ex rel. James W. Green v. Greer
  667 F.2d 585· 7th Cir.· 1981-12-10 ·cited 12×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness For State Court Findings
  A federal district court is not required to examine the full trial record in a habeas corpus petition alleging insufficiency of evidence if the petitioner fails to identify any inaccuracies or incompleteness in the factual summaries already before the court.
• Jordan v. Estelle
  594 F.2d 144· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a habeas petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel when the record does not support the state's factual assertions.
• Harkins v. Wyrick
  552 F.2d 1308· 8th Cir.· 1977-04-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that any error in denying a pretrial competency hearing was cured by a subsequent evidentiary hearing, and that the petitioner did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Gomez v. Beto
  402 F.2d 766· 5th Cir.· 1968-11-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court properly denied the habeas corpus petition without a full evidentiary hearing, as the state court's findings were supported by the record and applicable law.
• Overton Thomas Anthony v. Fitzharris
  389 F.2d 657· 9th Cir.· 1968-01-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing, as the state court proceedings were insufficient to establish the voluntariness of the guilty plea.
• Chizen v. Hunter
  809 F.2d 560· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-24 ·cited 11×·via Deference To State Court Findings
  A nolo contendere plea induced by an attorney's misrepresentation regarding the sentence is involuntary, even if the defendant signs a waiver form and the judge advises them of their rights.
• DeANGELO v. Louie L. Wainwright
  781 F.2d 1516· 11th Cir.· 1986-02-10 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the voluntariness of a statement for federal habeas review is a matter for independent federal determination, not subject to the presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), and that the Stone v. Powell doctrine does not bar Fifth and Sixth Amendment
• Paxton v. Jarvis
  735 F.2d 1306· 11th Cir.· 1984-07-06 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the petitioner's confessions were voluntary and the district court properly denied an evidentiary hearing.
• United States ex rel. Robert Gorham v. Franzen
  675 F.2d 932· 7th Cir.· 1982-04-19 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the petitioner established a prima facie case that the state appellate court's finding was not fairly supported by the record, warranting further review.
• Blair v. Armontrout
  976 F.2d 1130· 8th Cir.· 1992-09-18 ·cited 10×·via 28 U.S.C. § 2254(D) Presumption Of Correctness For State Court Findings
  The court held that the prosecutor's systematic use of peremptory challenges to exclude black jurors, coupled with appeals to racial prejudice in closing arguments, violated the defendant's right to a fair trial and entitled him to a new trial.
• Smith v. Collins
  964 F.2d 483· 5th Cir.· 1992-06-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition was proper, as the alleged errors did not rise to the level of constitutional violations or were harmless.
• Kavin Wayne Lincecum v. Collins
  958 F.2d 1271· 5th Cir.· 1992-04-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on lesser included offenses, and that the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and unconstitutionality of the death penalty stat
• Paradis v. A.J. Arave
  954 F.2d 1483· 9th Cir.· 1992-01-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding that the murder occurred in Idaho, and that the admission of evidence relating to another murder for which the defendant was acquitted did not violate due process or double jeopardy. The
• Lafferty v. Cook
  949 F.2d 1546· 10th Cir.· 1991-12-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court's determination of competency to stand trial, when supported by the record and applying the correct legal standard, is entitled to deference and should not be overturned on appeal.