159 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 552 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
Wilmario Devondric Trueblood challenged his 2014 Florida convictions for burglary and grand theft in a federal habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, raising claims regarding competency to stand trial, judicial impartiality, and denial of a second expert mental evaluation
-
Bernard Hughlon, a Florida state prisoner, sought federal habeas relief challenging his 2010 conviction for escape by arguing ineffective assistance of counsel, improper jury procedures, denial of a lesser-included offense instruction, and improper prosecutorial comments. The cou
-
Lwane Mansell, a Florida prisoner convicted of luring/enticing a child and lewd/lascivious conduct against an 11-year-old, filed a federal habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction, raising claims of prosecutorial misconduct, insufficient evidence, and ineffective assista
-
Sasha Nicole Pringle challenged her conviction for leaving the scene of a crash involving death in a federal habeas corpus petition, arguing her trial counsel was ineffective and that she was convicted on improper jury instructions. The court granted habeas relief on her claim th
-
Demetrius Flowers, a Florida inmate convicted of armed robbery and kidnapping, filed a federal habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction on eight grounds, including jury instruction errors, sufficiency of evidence claims, and ineffective assistance of counsel arguments. T
-
An inmate challenging his Florida burglary conviction claimed his trial counsel was ineffective in stipulating to his fingerprints, failing to request hearings on missing crime scene evidence, and not calling fingerprint experts to counter the state's evidence. The federal distri
-
Albert Jason Carter, an inmate challenging four state court convictions through a federal habeas petition, sought relief based on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his guilty pleas in four separate cases in which he received a cumulative twenty-year sentence.
-
The court held that the state court did not unreasonably apply federal law or make unreasonable factual determinations regarding the suppression of statements and the admission of testimony challenged under the Confrontation Clause.
-
The federal court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the state court's adjudications of the petitioner's claims were not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to show that the state court unreasonably applied federal law or unreasonably determined facts when denying his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-08-20
Christopher Spence, a prisoner challenging his state court conviction for sale of cannabis, petitioned for federal habeas corpus relief on six grounds claiming ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment. The District Court for the Middle District of Florida denie
-
A federal district court denied Ricky T. Oliver's petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his conviction for attempted murder, finding that the trial court properly allowed him to proceed pro se (representing himself) despite his last-minute request for counsel on the da
-
Curtis Louis Robinson, an inmate serving a nineteen-year sentence for drug and weapons offenses in Florida, filed a federal habeas corpus petition challenging his state convictions for possession of hydrocodone, sale or delivery of cocaine, possession of cannabis, and resisting a
-
The court held that the petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was procedurally barred because the state court had previously denied the underlying issues on direct appeal, and even if considered on the merits, the claim failed because the petitioner could not de
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally defaulted or failed on the merits, and thus he was not entitled to federal habeas relief.
-
An inmate convicted of selling controlled substances within 1000 feet of a specified area filed a federal habeas petition challenging his state conviction by raising five grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel. The district court denied the petition, finding that the state
-
Howard James Jackson, a Florida prisoner convicted of attempted murder in the first degree, petitioned for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, raising nine grounds based on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel related to his guilty plea. The U.S. District
-
The court held that the state appellate court's summary adjudication of the petitioner's claim was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to show the state court's decision was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, or based on an unreasonable determination of facts, thus denying habeas relief.
-
The federal court held that the state court's denial of the habeas petition was not an unreasonable application of federal law or an unreasonable determination of facts, and therefore denied the petition.
-
A Florida prisoner convicted of second-degree murder challenged his no-contest plea through a federal habeas petition, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to investigate the case and adequately disclose discovery evidence before advising him to plead guilty. The
-
The federal court denied the habeas petition, finding the state court's adjudication of the petitioner's claims was not contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, federal law and was not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were procedurally defaulted or, alternatively, that the state court's denial of these claims was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and insufficient evidence were meritless and did not warrant federal habeas corpus relief.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-06-04
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel, either at trial or on appeal, and therefore denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the state court's decisions were contrary to or unreasonably applied clearly established federal law, and therefore denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
-
Ford challenged his state court conviction for second degree murder and first degree arson, seeking federal habeas relief through a § 2254 petition on multiple grounds involving alleged ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel, primarily concerning the suppression he
-
The court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, and was not based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
Julio Garcia IV appealed his state convictions for aggravated battery with a deadly weapon, challenging them through a federal habeas petition on multiple grounds including ineffective assistance of counsel, prosecutorial misconduct, and sufficiency of the evidence. The district
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the state court's denial of his ineffective assistance of counsel claims was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
The court held that the state postconviction court reasonably applied federal law in denying the habeas petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, as the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice by showing he would have gone to trial but for counsel's alleged erro
-
The court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
Jamelle Rashard Smith challenged his conviction for attempted first-degree murder on grounds of insufficient evidence and ineffective assistance of counsel, but the federal district court rejected all claims because the state courts' decisions were neither contrary to nor an unre
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the state court's denial of his ineffective assistance of counsel claims was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law or based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
-
The court found the federal habeas petition to be timely filed, denying respondents' motion to dismiss on timeliness grounds. It also found grounds seven through nine to be procedurally defaulted and unexhausted, barring their review.
-
The court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
The court held that a claim based solely on state law regarding the withdrawal of a plea is not cognizable in federal habeas corpus proceedings. Furthermore, the court found that the state court's adjudication of the ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not contrary to cle
-
Michael Boyington, convicted in Florida state court of attempted murder and aggravated assault, filed a federal habeas petition challenging his conviction on six grounds, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, prosecutorial misconduct, and jury instruction error.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the state court's denial of his claims was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, or based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2021-02-04
Michael Kennedy, convicted in Duval County of two counts of aggravated assault with firearm discharge and one count of shooting or throwing a deadly missile, filed a federal habeas petition challenging his conviction on multiple grounds of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
-
The court denied Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus, finding that his claims were either procedurally defaulted, failed to meet the high bar of § 2254(d) deference, or lacked merit under established federal law.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the state court's denial of his ineffective assistance of counsel claim was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, or based on an unreasonable factual determination.
-
Raydel Alvarez was convicted of first-degree murder and other crimes related to a 2007 home invasion robbery, and he sought federal habeas relief arguing that his trial counsel was ineffective and the prosecutor made improper comments. The federal district court denied all nine g
-
The court held that the applicant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to suppress pre-Miranda statements was procedurally barred due to failure to exhaust state remedies and present the specific factual basis to the state court. Even on the merits, the claim
-
The court held that the Petitioner is not entitled to habeas relief because the state court's decisions were not contrary to, nor did they involve an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, and were not based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
-
The court held that trial counsel was not ineffective for failing to challenge the traffic stop or file a motion to suppress, as the stop was lawful and evidence was in plain view.
-
The court held that defects in state collateral proceedings are not cognizable on federal habeas review and denied the petition.
-
The federal court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding the state court's decision to admit the petitioner's statement was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
Jordan J. Gadson challenged his first-degree murder conviction by filing a federal habeas corpus petition, arguing that jury instructions on felony murder and principals constituted a constructive amendment of the indictment, that trial counsel failed to advise him of the charges
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were unexhausted and, even if considered on the merits, lacked merit under the applicable standards of review.