159 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 552 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
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
-
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.
-
943 F.2d 407·
4th Cir.·
1991-08-19
·cited 10×
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas petition, affirming the denial of summary judgment on all grounds.
-
The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of habeas corpus, holding that the state trial court's failure to instruct the jury on the 'voluntary release' element of kidnapping was harmless error.
-
The dissenting judge holds that the district court correctly found Bolder's trial counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to present age and background mitigating evidence, and that post-conviction counsel was also ineffective.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel because the attorney's advice regarding parole eligibility was not deficient and the petitioner failed to show prejudice.
-
A suspect's statement, "I have to get me a good lawyer, man. Can I make a phone call?", made during custodial interrogation, constitutes an unequivocal request for counsel, requiring cessation of all questioning.
-
The court held that the state court's factual finding that no deal existed between the prosecutor and a key witness was supported by the record and thus presumed correct, meaning no knowing use of perjured testimony occurred. The court also held that the defendant's waiver of Mir
-
The court held that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to investigate his mental health history, which likely impacted the outcome of his guilty plea.
-
The court held that a sentence of life without parole is unconstitutional under United States v. Jackson if it is imposed only on defendants who choose to go to trial rather than plead guilty. The court also held that the denial of a motion to change a plea and the admissibility
-
852 F.2d 268·
7th Cir.·
1988-07-15
·cited 10×
The court held that despite a potentially suggestive pre-trial identification procedure, the victim's identification was sufficiently reliable under the totality of the circumstances to satisfy due process, and thus the habeas corpus writ should not have been granted.
-
The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the appellant as an accomplice to capital murder and that the exclusion of his accomplice's hearsay declarations did not deprive him of due process.
-
The court held that the district court erred in granting a stay of execution because the petitioner's claims were successive, procedurally defaulted, and lacked substantial grounds for relief.
-
834 F.2d 1366·
7th Cir.·
1987-12-04
·cited 10×
The court held that the petitioner received adequate Miranda warnings and voluntarily confessed, thus his Fifth Amendment rights were not violated.
-
833 F.2d 663·
7th Cir.·
1987-11-09
·cited 10×
The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because the state court's conviction was supported by sufficient evidence and the petitioner did not demonstrate a constitutional violation or the need for a federal evidentiary hearing.
-
823 F.2d 387·
10th Cir.·
1987-07-07
·cited 10×
The court held that the jury's consideration of an unadmitted police report did not violate appellant's rights, nor did an impermissibly suggestive photographic identification, because under the totality of the circumstances, the identification was reliable.
-
800 F.2d 884·
9th Cir.·
1986-09-23
·cited 10×
State court findings on competency to waive counsel and the knowing and intelligent nature of that waiver, if fairly supported by the record, are entitled to a presumption of correctness in federal habeas proceedings.
-
The court held that the evidence presented at trial was constitutionally sufficient to permit a rational trier of fact to find the appellant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, despite discrepancies in eyewitness identification.
-
The court held that the Andersons are entitled to an evidentiary hearing to determine the sentencing judge's understanding of his sentencing discretion.
-
The court held that the petitioner failed to overcome the presumption of correctness accorded to the state court's finding that his guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered.
-
The dissenting judge argues that the identification procedures were unnecessarily suggestive and created a substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification, violating due process.
-
The court held that the petitioner had exhausted state remedies for direct appeal issues and affirmed the dismissal of ineffective assistance of counsel and jury selection claims.
-
The district court erred by not independently reviewing the state court record or holding a hearing to determine if the relief granted for the broken plea agreement was constitutionally adequate.
-
The court held that the district court erred by failing to conduct a de novo determination of the magistrate's report, as required by the Federal Magistrate's Act, before issuing a writ of habeas corpus.
-
507 F.2d 105·
5th Cir.·
1975-01-22
·cited 10×
The district court's denial of habeas corpus relief must be vacated because it acted without reviewing the state trial transcript and failed to hold an evidentiary hearing.
-
The court held that the state suppression hearing was adequate and the trial court correctly determined the confession was voluntary, affirming the denial of habeas corpus.
-
The court held that a confession obtained through deception, without other coercive circumstances, is not rendered involuntary under pre-Miranda law, and thus habeas corpus relief was properly denied.
-
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing because the prisoner had not exhausted state remedies for most claims and the state court's findings on the interrogation claim were presumed correct.
-
354 F.2d 496·
5th Cir.·
1965-12-10
·cited 10×
The district court erred in denying the petition for habeas corpus without a hearing, as significant constitutional questions regarding the substitution of judges and the right to a jury trial were presented.
-
963 F.2d 1044·
7th Cir.·
1992-05-14
·cited 9×
The court held that the Des Plaines confession was voluntary and that the Batson claim was barred by Teague v. Lane because Powers v. Ohio announced a new rule.
-
831 F.2d 1547·
11th Cir.·
1987-11-13
·cited 9×
The court held that limiting cross-examination into a witness's potential deal with the state violated the Confrontation Clause and was not harmless error.
-
The court, bound by habeas corpus rules, could not find the Indiana Supreme Court's findings clearly wrong, despite doubts about the identification evidence.
-
693 F.2d 121·
11th Cir.·
1982-12-06
·cited 9×
The exclusion of a reliable confession, which was crucial to the defense, violated the defendant's due process rights, even if it was inadmissible hearsay under state law.
-
The Court held that the habeas petition was timely filed and that the petitioner's claims regarding the exclusion of evidence, use of privileged communications, and introduction of bad acts evidence were either not cognizable, unexhausted, procedurally barred, or without merit. F
-
891 F.2d 1014·
2d Cir.·
1989-12-12
·cited 8×
The dissenting judge would reverse the district court's denial of habeas corpus, finding the admission of an unconstitutionally obtained tape recording was not harmless error.
-
The court held that a rational trier of fact could find the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt, given the substantial agreement among witness accounts and the reasons to doubt the credibility of the defense's testimony.
-
The court held that the totality of the circumstances, not just the presence of promises, determines confession voluntariness, and affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition.
-
847 F.2d 211·
5th Cir.·
1988-06-16
·cited 8×
The court held that the identification procedure was unnecessarily suggestive and unreliable, violating due process, and affirmed the district court's grant of habeas corpus relief.
-
The court should afford Hall an evidentiary hearing on his claim of newly discovered evidence.
-
800 F.2d 1463·
9th Cir.·
1986-09-29
·cited 8×
The admission of an autopsy videotape, even if unpleasant, does not violate due process if it is probative of the cause of death and not unduly inflammatory, especially when presented clinically with expert testimony.
-
The court held that a federal evidentiary hearing was not required because the petitioner's claims were incredible and unsupported by specifics, and the state court's findings of historical fact were entitled to a presumption of correctness. The court also held that the failure t
-
793 F.2d 772·
6th Cir.·
1986-06-19
·cited 8×
The Sixth Circuit held that the trial court's denial of a continuance to secure a witness violated the appellant's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights, warranting a grant of habeas corpus relief.
-
The court held that the district court erred in applying 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to the ultimate issue of confession voluntariness, which is a question of law, not a finding of fact. The case must be reexamined in light of Miller v. Fenton.
-
The court held that the Batson v. Kentucky rule should not be applied retroactively to federal habeas proceedings, and vacated the district court's stay of execution.
-
The court affirmed the denial of federal habeas corpus relief, finding no violation of due process from the admission of evidence regarding the victim's will, the alleged withholding of exculpatory evidence, or the jury charge.
-
The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because the lineup identification was not unconstitutional and the rule of lenity did not apply to the sentencing issue.
-
723 F.2d 1165·
5th Cir.·
1984-01-30
·cited 8×
A restriction on cross-examination of a prosecution witness regarding potential bias, even if it violates the Sixth Amendment's confrontation clause, can be harmless error if other evidence of guilt is overwhelming.
-
The court held that the petitioner's guilty plea to second-degree murder was voluntary and intelligent, but his plea to sodomy was not, affirming the district court's partial grant of habeas corpus relief.
-
The court held that summary judgment was inappropriate because a genuine issue of material fact existed regarding whether the state trial judge promised a specific sentence in exchange for the guilty plea.
-