Writ Of Habeas Corpus

3,651 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 2,273 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• O'Brien v. Putnam
  591 F.2d 53· 9th Cir.· 1979-01-31 ·cited 18×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the Parole Commission did not abuse its discretion by considering the severity of the offense and by setting the parole hearing at the one-third point of the sentence, as its regulations allowed for such actions.
• Dominick Codispoti Y-1353 v. Howard
  589 F.2d 135· 3d Cir.· 1978-12-08 ·cited 18×
  A federal court may review a habeas corpus petition when state court delay in ruling on a new trial motion is excessive and effectively denies the petitioner's right to appeal.
• Grace v. Butterworth
  586 F.2d 878· 1st Cir.· 1978-11-17 ·cited 18×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the state courts' denial of new trial motions, based on newly discovered evidence, did not violate due process because the evidence was found to be cumulative and not credible, and the state courts conducted a full and fair review.
• Standlee v. Rhay
  557 F.2d 1303· 9th Cir.· 1977-07-21 ·cited 18×
  Collateral estoppel does not bar a parole revocation hearing after a criminal acquittal because parole revocation is a remedial, not punitive, proceeding with a lower burden of proof.
• United States ex rel. George H. Healey, Jr. v. Cannon
  553 F.2d 1052· 7th Cir.· 1977-04-21 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the majority's decision, finding no justification to invalidate the guilty plea.
• Fronczak v. Warden, EL Reno Reformatory, EL Reno, Okla. & United States Bd. of Parole
  553 F.2d 1219· 10th Cir.· 1977-03-03 ·cited 18×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the reasons provided for denying parole release satisfied the Administrative Procedure Act and due process requirements, and that the application of parole guidelines was permissible under the Federal Youth Corrections Act.
• ST. John v. Estelle
  544 F.2d 894· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-03 ·cited 18×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The admission of evidence of prior convictions solely to show general criminal disposition, if not objected to contemporaneously, does not warrant habeas corpus relief due to procedural default.
• Kelley v. Estelle
  521 F.2d 238· 5th Cir.· 1975-10-17 ·cited 18×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court affirmed the denial of federal habeas corpus relief, finding the in-court identification was independent of any potentially suggestive pretrial photographic identification.
• Grattan v. Sigler
  525 F.2d 329· 9th Cir.· 1975-08-06 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the prisoner was entitled to a new parole hearing because the Board improperly classified his offense severity and failed to provide timely notice and reasons for the classification.
• United States ex rel. William Hayward v. Johnson
  508 F.2d 322· 3d Cir.· 1975-01-28 ·cited 18×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a juvenile's confession, obtained after Miranda warnings and considering the totality of the circumstances, was voluntary and admissible, and that the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing.
• Rutherford v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  508 F.2d 122· 9th Cir.· 1974-12-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the search warrant was validly drawn and issued, and the jury's guilty verdict was reasonable.
• Mann v. Smith
  488 F.2d 245· 9th Cir.· 1973-07-09 ·cited 18×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  A guilty plea waives all prior constitutional claims, precluding federal habeas corpus review of those claims.
• United States ex rel. Fred LaFAY v. Hon. Harry Fritz
  455 F.2d 297· 2d Cir.· 1972-01-26 ·cited 18×
  A defendant's subjective belief, based on counsel's erroneous sentence estimate, does not render a guilty plea involuntary, even if reasonable.
• Freeman v. Page
  443 F.2d 493· 10th Cir.· 1971-05-27 ·cited 18×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the appellant's guilty pleas were valid under pre-Boykin standards, and the Boykin decision's procedural rule does not apply retroactively.
• Fisher v. Palmer C. Scafati
  439 F.2d 307· 1st Cir.· 1971-03-04 ·cited 18×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the district court properly disregarded the state court's findings regarding Miranda warnings and that the subsequent confessions were inadmissible due to incomplete warnings.
• Dolphus v. State
  243 So. 2d 573· Fla.· 1971-01-27 ·cited 18×
• Sinclair v. Henderson
  435 F.2d 125· 5th Cir.· 1970-11-17 ·cited 18×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a federal court cannot decline jurisdiction over a civil rights complaint based on the exhaustion doctrine, and the allegations of extreme maltreatment warrant adjudication on the merits.
• Graves v. Beto
  424 F.2d 524· 5th Cir.· 1970-04-03 ·cited 18×
• Thomas v. Beto
  423 F.2d 642· 5th Cir.· 1970-02-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel when his attorney failed to advise him of his right to appeal, thus entitling him to an out-of-time appeal or retrial.
• Bloss v. People OF the State OF Mich.
  421 F.2d 903· 6th Cir.· 1970-02-17 ·cited 18×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  A state prisoner has no absolute federal constitutional right to bail pending appeal, and federal courts will not review state court discretion in granting or withholding bail if state remedies have not been exhausted.
• Bernes B. Stone v. Wingo
  416 F.2d 857· 6th Cir.· 1969-10-03 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding no merit in the appellant's claims regarding indictment amendment, unlawful search and seizure, quotient verdict, or failure to instruct on aiding and abetting.
• Krieger v. Brig. Gen. James Terry
  413 F.2d 73· 9th Cir.· 1969-06-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the habeas corpus application without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, but that the district court should have held the proceeding in abeyance rather than dismissing it.
• Morton Sobell v. Attorney General OF the United States
  400 F.2d 986· 3d Cir.· 1968-08-16 ·cited 18×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a federal prisoner seeking credit for pre-sentence or post-sentence imprisonment must pursue relief in the sentencing court under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, not through a declaratory judgment action.
• Roach v. Bennett
  392 F.2d 743· 8th Cir.· 1968-04-15 ·cited 18×
  A state prisoner is entitled to a federal habeas corpus hearing if the state's fact-finding procedure was inadequate, and the federal court should grant a plenary hearing on claims of mental incompetency and plea involuntariness, potentially requiring appointment of counsel.
• Ganger v. Peyton
  379 F.2d 709· 4th Cir.· 1967-05-30 ·cited 18×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a federal court should not vacate a state court conviction for ineffective counsel without the prisoner first exhausting state remedies. However, a conviction obtained when the prosecuting attorney had a conflict of interest, representing the victim in a relat
• Antranik Paroutian v. United States
  370 F.2d 631· 2d Cir.· 1967-01-03 ·cited 18×
  The court held that incriminating statements made to a cellmate, who was not a government agent and was not interrogating the defendant, are admissible even if made after indictment and retention of counsel.
• Masters v. Eide
  353 F.2d 517· 8th Cir.· 1965-12-02 ·cited 18×
  A federal prisoner's petition for a writ of habeas corpus can be dismissed without a hearing if the records and files conclusively show the petitioner is entitled to no relief.
• Davis v. State
  166 So. 2d 189· Fla. 1st DCA· 1964-06-16 ·cited 18×
  Davis appealed his conviction for breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor, claiming his constitutional rights were violated in his second trial after his initial conviction was vacated. The court affirmed his conviction, rejecting his arguments that he lacked gr
• Allen v. United States
  327 F.2d 58· 5th Cir.· 1964-01-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a motion under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 cannot be used to question the actions of the Board of Parole regarding sentence execution, and habeas corpus was unavailable due to venue.
• Larios v. Madigan
  299 F.2d 98· 9th Cir.· 1962-01-26 ·cited 18×
  A federal sentence does not begin to run until the prisoner is received at a place of detention to await transportation for service of the sentence, and a sentencing judge's recommendation for concurrent state confinement is not binding.
• Linden v. Dickson
  287 F.2d 55· 9th Cir.· 1961-01-31 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a district court is not required to hold a hearing or examine the state court record if the allegations of fact in a habeas corpus application, even if true, would not entitle the applicant to relief.
• Singleton v. Chesley H. Looney
  218 F.2d 526· 10th Cir.· 1955-01-03 ·cited 18×
  A prisoner conditionally released under 18 U.S.C. § 4164 must serve the remainder of their original sentence upon violation of release conditions, even if they protested the conditions, and is not entitled to credit for time spent on parole.
• Risken v. United States
  197 F.2d 959· 8th Cir.· 1952-07-10 ·cited 18×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that a motion to vacate a sentence under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 is a collateral attack, and objections to the indictment's sufficiency, if not raised at trial or on direct appeal, are waived unless the indictment is fundamentally defective.
• Hunter v. Thomas
  173 F.2d 810· 10th Cir.· 1949-03-17 ·cited 18×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that the trial court's order granting a rehearing was void because it was not made within the time prescribed by Rule 59(d) for sua sponte action, and thus the original order discharging the petitioner was reinstated.
• Fisher v. Schilder
  131 F.2d 522· 10th Cir.· 1942-10-30 ·cited 18×
  The court held that an erroneous recital of a guilty plea, when a nolo contendere plea was entered, is not a fundamental error voiding the judgment and sentence, and the sufficiency of the indictment is not challengeable on habeas corpus.
• Jones v. Dowd
  128 F.2d 331· 7th Cir.· 1942-05-22 ·cited 18×
  A federal court cannot grant a writ of habeas corpus to review alleged errors of law by a state trial court if that court had jurisdiction, and if the petitioner has not exhausted available state remedies.
• Hayden v. Warden, United States Penitentiary, McNeil Island, Wash.
  124 F.2d 514· 9th Cir.· 1941-12-20 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a federal sentence to begin after a state sentence is not void for uncertainty, and the sentence did not begin to run until the appellant was received at the penitentiary.
• Moon v. Smith
  138 Fla. 410· Fla.· 1939-06-02 ·cited 18×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  J.D. Moon was arrested for violating Orlando's zoning ordinance by operating a tourist camp in a residential zone. The Florida Supreme Court held that the zoning ordinance was invalid and unenforceable because the required district map was never attached to the ordinance, making
• Bouie v. State
  266 So. 3d 879· Fla. 5th DCA· 2019-03-29 ·cited 17×
  The trial court properly dismissed the habeas corpus petition.
• Walton v. State
  246 So. 3d 246· Fla.· 2018-05-17 ·cited 17×
  Jason Walton appeals the denial of his successive postconviction motion seeking to vacate his death sentences for three murders committed during a robbery and burglary. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the denial, rejecting Walton's arguments that changes in capital sentencing l
• Harrel Franklin Braddy v. State
  219 So. 3d 803· Fla.· 2017-06-15 ·cited 17×
  Harrel Braddy, sentenced to death for kidnapping, murder, and other crimes, appeals the denial of postconviction relief. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of a new guilt phase trial but vacated the death sentence and granted a new penalty phase based on Hurst v. Flori
• Anderson v. State
  220 So. 3d 1133· Fla.· 2017-03-09 ·cited 17×
  Charles Anderson challenges his 1999 conviction for first-degree murder and death sentence in a capital case. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the conviction but vacates the death sentence based on Hurst v. Florida, requiring a new penalty phase with a unanimous jury recommendat
• Renaldo Devon McGirth v. State
  209 So. 3d 1146· Fla.· 2017-01-26 ·cited 17×
  McGirth was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. On postconviction appeal, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of his Rule 3.851 motion but granted his habeas corpus petition, vacating his death sentence and remanding for a new penalty phase proceedi
• Dessaure v. State
  55 So. 3d 478· Fla.· 2010-10-07 ·cited 17×
  Kenneth Dessaure appeals the trial court's denial of his post-conviction relief motion and habeas petition following his conviction for first-degree murder and death sentence in the 1999 killing of Cindy Riedweg. The Florida Supreme Court affirms, rejecting claims that trial coun
• Runner O. Santana v. Henry
  12 So. 3d 843· Fla. 1st DCA· 2009-05-29 ·cited 17×
  A Florida inmate filed a habeas corpus petition alleging he was entitled to immediate release based on improper sentencing credit calculations. The trial court summarily dismissed the petition without notice or response from the Department of Corrections, citing failure to exhaus
• J.D. v. State
  954 So. 2d 93· Fla. 5th DCA· 2007-04-20 ·cited 17×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  J.D., a juvenile, appealed his indirect contempt conviction and the imposition of consecutive fifteen-day secure detention sentences for multiple violations of a behavior order. The Fifth District reversed, holding that section 985.216, Florida Statutes prohibits stacking consecu
• Pardo v. State
  941 So. 2d 1057· Fla.· 2006-06-29 ·cited 17×
  Manuel Pardo Jr., convicted of nine murders and sentenced to death, appealed the denial of postconviction relief and petitioned for habeas corpus. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of postconviction relief and denied the habeas petition, holding that Pardo failed to d
• Raymundo Zeno v. State
  910 So. 2d 394· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-09-21 ·cited 17×
  The court held that a petition for writ of habeas corpus could be granted to provide relief for fundamentally erroneous jury instructions, even after the term of court expired, to maintain uniformity of decisions.
• Woullard v. Bishop
  734 So. 2d 1151· Fla. 1st DCA· 1999-06-02 ·cited 17×
  The court quashed a summary denial of habeas corpus relief and remanded for further proceedings, holding that a prisoner's allegations were sufficient to make a prima facie showing of exhaustion of administrative remedies required for judicial review of prison disciplinary procee
• Thomas v. Singletary
  729 So. 2d 369· Fla.· 1998-12-24 ·cited 17×
  Two inmates challenged the retrospective application of amendments to Florida's Control Release prison overcrowding program, which ultimately voided their established control release dates. The Florida Supreme Court held that the amendments did not violate ex post facto principle