Presumption Of Regularity Of Judgment

14 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Kress v. United States
  411 F.2d 16· 8th Cir.· 1969-05-29 ·cited 60×
  A guilty plea is valid if voluntarily and intelligently made, with understanding of the charges and consequences, and a factual basis, even if the defendant later expresses dissatisfaction with jail conditions or claims ineffective counsel.
• Reuel Lawson v. State
  231 So. 2d 205· Fla.· 1970-01-28 ·cited 38×
  A Florida prisoner serving consecutive sentences challenged whether he had standing to file a motion to vacate his initial conviction based on lack of counsel. The Florida Supreme Court held that a prisoner serving consecutive sentences is "in custody" under any one of them for p
• Smith v. United States
  339 F.2d 519· 8th Cir.· 1964-12-30 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to vacate the sentence, finding that the plea was entered voluntarily with understanding and that counsel was effective.
• Conley v. State
  160 So. 2d 752· Fla. 1st DCA· 1964-02-18 ·cited 18×
  Carl Conley appealed the denial of his motion for relief from a 1959 guilty plea to robbery, breaking and entering, and grand larceny convictions. The Florida appellate court affirmed the denial, holding that Conley's claims—based on an alleged plea bargain with the sheriff, inad
• Volney Davis v. United States
  226 F.2d 834· 8th Cir.· 1955-11-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner competently and intelligently waived his constitutional right to counsel at arraignment and sentencing, and was not misled about the potential sentence.
• Vaccaro v. State
  152 Fla. 123· Fla.· 1942-12-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a tax deed description must be certain within itself or refer to matters within the deed, and extrinsic evidence cannot be used to clarify it.
• Dunn v. Simmons
  877 F.2d 1275· 6th Cir.· 1989-06-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Kentucky Supreme Court's procedure for challenging guilty pleas does not violate the Constitution, as it requires the defendant to present evidence of invalidity before the state must prove the plea's validity.
• Solomon McNAIR v. United States
  235 F.2d 856· D.C. Cir.· 1956-07-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appellant failed to meet his burden of proving he did not waive his right to counsel at arraignment, despite the delay in challenging his conviction.
• Word v. United States
  604 F.2d 1127· 8th Cir.· 1979-08-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel and that the admission of hospital records was not erroneous, thus affirming the denial of the motion to vacate judgment and sentence.
• United States ex rel. James Brennan v. Hon. Edward M. FAY
  353 F.2d 56· 2d Cir.· 1965-11-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the New York standard for coram nobis proceedings, requiring proof by a preponderance of the credible evidence, is consistent with the federal habeas corpus standard, and thus no new federal evidentiary hearing was required.
• Haywood Williams v. United States
  481 F.2d 339· 2d Cir.· 1973-06-20 ·cited 4×
  A federal district court is not required to redetermine a claim that has already been litigated and decided on the merits in another federal court, even if that court is in a different circuit, absent exceptional circumstances.
• Widmer v. Johnston
  136 F.2d 416· 9th Cir.· 1943-06-11 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the denial of the writ of habeas corpus, finding that the appellant was not denied his constitutional right to counsel and that his guilty pleas were voluntary.
• Kinsey v. Davis
  154 Fla. 889· Fla.· 1944-10-06
  Habeas corpus was an inappropriate remedy to challenge an indictment's validity after a conviction had been affirmed on appeal, especially when the challenge required evidence outside the original record.