159 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 552 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
Ian Chad Webster, a Florida state prisoner, petitioned for federal habeas corpus relief challenging his guilty pleas to conspiracy to traffic cocaine, possession of cocaine while armed, and tampering with evidence. The court rejected all seven of Webster's claims, finding that hi
-
A Florida inmate convicted of sexual battery and lewd molestation of a child sought federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, raising twelve grounds including claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, violation of his right to conflict-free counsel, and prosecutorial
-
The court held that the petitioner is not entitled to federal habeas corpus relief because the state court's decisions were not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination of the facts.
-
The federal court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding the state court's adjudications of the petitioner's claims were not contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law.
-
A guilty plea waives non-jurisdictional claims, including ineffective assistance of counsel, unless the claim directly implicates the knowing and voluntary nature of the plea itself. Counsel's strategic decision not to file a pre-trial motion, based on a reasonable assessment of
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding erroneous jury instructions and ineffective assistance of counsel were procedurally barred or without merit under federal habeas review standards.
-
The court held that most of the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were procedurally barred by her nolo contendere plea, and the remaining claims did not meet the high standard for federal habeas relief under AEDPA.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally defaulted and without merit, and therefore denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus.
-
Zachery Keith Turner, convicted of lewd and lascivious battery on a minor, filed a federal habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction and 15-year sentence on multiple grounds, including claims of competency-to-stand-trial error, ineffective assistance of counsel, and Crawf
-
Michael Wayne Shellito, a state prisoner serving life without parole for first-degree murder, sought federal habeas corpus relief challenging his conviction on three grounds: suppression of material evidence, ineffective assistance of trial counsel at the guilt phase, and absence
-
The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the state court's denial of the petitioner's ineffective assistance of counsel claims was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
The court held that the applicant's claims regarding counsel's failure to adopt a pro se motion and present psychologist testimony are procedurally barred from federal review. The entrapment defense claim, however, is subject to review on the merits.
-
The court held that Petitioner is not entitled to federal habeas relief on any of his grounds for relief.
-
The court held that the state appellate court's adjudication of the petitioner's claim regarding the suppression of eyewitness identification was neither contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law, nor based on an unreasonable determination o
-
The court held that the petitioner's claim regarding the information being filed in bad faith was procedurally defaulted and unexhausted, and alternatively, the information provided adequate notice. The court also held that the petitioner's sentence was a lawful enhancement as a
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding due process and equal protection were unexhausted and procedurally barred, and his ineffective assistance of counsel claims were not meritorious under the deferential AEDPA standard.
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and the motion for stay and abeyance.
-
Larry G. Jossey, Jr., an inmate proceeding without counsel, petitioned for federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his state court conviction for armed robbery on eight grounds, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, jury instruction errors, and
-
A man convicted of sexually abusing his girlfriend's nine-year-old daughter filed a federal habeas corpus petition challenging his conviction, arguing that certain trial court errors violated his constitutional rights. The district court denied relief, finding that some claims we
-
The court held that the petitioner's claim regarding a Nelson hearing is not cognizable on federal habeas review as it is a matter of state law. The court also held that the petitioner's Faretta claim fails because his request to proceed pro se was not clear and unequivocal, and
-
The court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's claims was neither 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 failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel regarding competency and that his second claim was procedurally barred.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-03-18
The federal court denied a state prisoner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that his claims were either procedurally barred, moot, or failed to meet the high deference standard required by AEDPA.
-
The court held that a petitioner released from custody is not eligible for federal habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 unless they demonstrate continuing collateral consequences.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were either unmeritorious or unexhausted, and that the state court's decisions were not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-02-28
The court held that the petitioner failed to establish that the state court's denial of his claims was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, or based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
M.D. Fla.·
2020-02-18
The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were denied because they either failed to meet the Strickland standard or were procedurally defaulted and lacked merit. The court applied the highly deferential AEDPA standard, finding no basis to ov
-
S.D. Fla.·
2020-02-18
Robert Gorham sought federal habeas relief arguing his trial attorney failed to convey a five-year pretrial plea offer, violating his Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel. The District Court found the state trial court improperly applied the legal standard for
-
The court held that the petitioner is not entitled to federal habeas corpus relief because the state court's decisions were not contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law and were based on reasonable determinations of fact.
-
Steve Anderson, an inmate serving a life sentence for first-degree murder and carrying a concealed firearm, sought federal habeas relief challenging his 2009 state court convictions, raising claims including judicial bias during jury selection, insufficient evidence for the firea
-
William Carson Merrill challenged his Florida manslaughter with a firearm conviction through federal habeas corpus, raising seven grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel claims under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments. The district court applied the strict deferential stand
-
The federal court denied a state prisoner's habeas corpus petition because the state court's rejection of his claims regarding sentencing enhancements was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
-
Shuron Antwoune Hester filed a federal habeas petition challenging his Florida conviction for sexual battery and lewd or lascivious molestation of a child. The District Court denied the petition, finding that several claims were procedurally barred due to insufficient exhaustion
-
The federal court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus, finding that the state court's adjudication of the petitioner's claims was not contrary to, nor an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law and was not based on an unreasonable determination of t
-
The federal court denied the habeas petition because the state court's denial of the ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law, nor based on an unreasonable factual determination.
-
James Curry, an inmate convicted of armed robbery in Florida state court, filed a federal habeas petition challenging his conviction based on six grounds of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, including claims that counsel failed to raise Brady violations regarding a missing
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel lack merit, and he is not entitled to federal habeas relief.
-
The court held that the petitioner is not entitled to federal habeas corpus relief because the state court's decisions were not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law.
-
The court held that the state court's denial of the motion to suppress was not contrary to federal law and that the sentencing court's consideration of the timing of the defendant's remorse did not violate due process.
-
Terry Ragland was convicted of second-degree murder and attempted armed robbery in the 2010 murder of a robbery victim. The federal district court denied Ragland's habeas petition challenging his conviction on grounds of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, finding that each
-
Efrain Camarill Cruz, a Mexican citizen convicted in 2013 of soliciting a minor and traveling to meet a minor for illegal sexual conduct, filed a federal habeas corpus petition challenging his guilty plea on grounds that he was mentally incompetent, his counsel was ineffective, a
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that his counsel's performance was deficient or that any alleged deficiencies prejudiced his defense, and therefore denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
-
The court held that most of the applicant's claims were procedurally barred from federal review due to failure to properly present them in state court. The remaining claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was denied as the state court's decision was not contrary to or an unre
-
The court held that the petitioner's claims were not cognizable on federal habeas review or were waived by his voluntary plea, and that the state court's factual findings were entitled to deference.
-
The district court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus.
-
The court held that while petitioner's counsel's performance was deficient, it did not prejudice the outcome, thus denying habeas relief.
-
The court held that the Florida Parole Commission did not abuse its discretion in revoking Petitioner's conditional release supervision, as it accepted the hearing examiner's findings of guilt and acted within its statutory authority.
-
The court held that the state court's denial of the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel was not contrary to federal law and was based on reasonable factual determinations, thus denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus.
-
The court found that the state court's adjudication of the ineffective assistance of counsel claim was not contrary to federal law, an unreasonable application of federal law, or based on an unreasonable determination of facts.
-
The court held that most of the petitioner's claims were procedurally barred, failed to meet the standards for federal habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), or were based on state law issues not cognizable in federal habeas corpus.