Rose V. Lundy

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

• Algar Ferguson v. Judge James A. Knight
  809 F.2d 1239· 6th Cir.· 1987-01-27 ·cited 2×
  The court should not affirm the judgment because the majority improperly considered a prior conviction as evidence of guilt, which was not presented to or relied upon by state courts.
• Dukes v. A.L. Lockhart
  769 F.2d 504· 8th Cir.· 1985-08-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a federal district court must dismiss a state habeas petition containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims, and remanded for reconsideration in light of Rose v. Lundy.
• Royal v. Wyrick
  694 F.2d 525· 8th Cir.· 1982-12-07 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of Royal's claims without prejudice, but the concurring judge disagreed with the majority's reasoning on exhaustion of state remedies.
• Rodriguez v. Hoke
  928 F.2d 534· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-15 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust available state court remedies for all claims raised in his habeas corpus petition.
• Horowitz v. Louie L. Wainwright
  709 F.2d 1403· 11th Cir.· 1983-07-18 ·cited 1×
  The court held that federal habeas corpus petitions containing both exhausted and unexhausted claims must be dismissed unless the unexhausted claims are deleted.
• Johnson v. Singletary
  883 F. Supp. 1535· M.D. Fla.· 1995-04-26
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding sufficiency of evidence for multiple attempted murder counts and sentencing errors were either procedurally defaulted, without merit, or not cognizable in federal habeas corpus review.
• Campbell v. Blodgett
  927 F.2d 444· 9th Cir.· 1991-02-27
  The court held that it would defer ruling on the federal habeas corpus petition until the Washington Supreme Court ruled on related issues to avoid piecemeal litigation.
• Tyler v. Armontrout
  917 F.2d 1138· 8th Cir.· 1990-10-31
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition and Rule 60(b) motion, finding that the claims constituted an abuse of the writ because they were deliberately withheld from a prior petition.
• Al Mancuso v. Scully
  824 F.2d 154· 2d Cir.· 1987-07-27
  The court held that recent Supreme Court decisions did not alter the prior ruling that the jury instructions in Mancuso's felony murder trial were harmless error and did not violate Sandstrom v. Montana.