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

• MAY v. Collins
  948 F.2d 162· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-13 ·cited 12×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the petitioner's Sixth Amendment claim was a reargument of a previously decided Eighth Amendment claim and thus barred as a successive petition. The court denied the certificate of probable cause and dismissed the petition.
• Searcy v. Singletary
  590 So. 2d 1034· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-12-13 ·cited 12×
  Edgar Searcy, an inmate convicted of sexual offenses, challenged the Department of Corrections' denial of provisional credits (gain time) under Florida law. The court reversed the lower court's decision, finding that the circuit court applied an outdated version of the statute an
• Puiatti v. Dugger
  589 So. 2d 231· Fla.· 1991-10-03 ·cited 12×
  Carl Puiatti, convicted and sentenced to death for kidnapping, robbery, and first-degree murder, appealed the trial court's denial of his rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief and petitioned for habeas corpus. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's denial of
• Fretwell v. A.L. Lockhart
  946 F.2d 571· 8th Cir.· 1991-09-23 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority erred in finding ineffective assistance of counsel and in ordering resentencing to life imprisonment.
• Harris v. Champion
  938 F.2d 1062· 10th Cir.· 1991-06-17 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court modified its previous order to delete the requirement that two specific cases be consolidated, but reaffirmed its prior opinion regarding the investigation of constitutional allegations concerning the provision of appellate counsel to indigent defendants.
• Simmons v. State
  579 So. 2d 874· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-05-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the state circuit court correctly denied the defendant's motions for postconviction relief because the available procedural remedies had lapsed or were inapplicable to the claims presented.
• Kenley v. Armontrout
  937 F.2d 1298· 8th Cir.· 1991-05-17 ·cited 12×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel during the sentencing phase of his capital trial due to counsel's failure to present available mitigating evidence.
• United States v. Lane
  926 F.2d 694· 7th Cir.· 1991-03-08 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that defense counsel's failure to ensure an alibi witness's appearance at trial, despite diligent efforts to locate her, did not constitute constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Harris v. Luckey
  918 F.2d 888· 11th Cir.· 1990-11-16 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The district court correctly applied the law of the case doctrine to deny a motion to dismiss based on new grounds not previously raised or ruled upon.
• Ford v. Armontrout
  916 F.2d 457· 8th Cir.· 1990-10-11 ·cited 12×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the victim's in-court identification was reliable, evidence of other crimes was properly admitted, the speedy trial claim was procedurally barred, and counsel was not ineffective.
• Rivera v. Dir., Dep't OF Corr., State OF Ill.
  915 F.2d 280· 7th Cir.· 1990-09-27 ·cited 12×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that excluding a co-defendant's confession that exculpated the defendant, solely on the grounds of hearsay and the declarant's unavailability for cross-examination, violated the defendant's due process rights.
• Boyd v. Puckett
  905 F.2d 895· 5th Cir.· 1990-07-17 ·cited 12×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  A federal habeas court cannot grant relief based solely on newly discovered evidence that is relevant only to the guilt or innocence of a state prisoner.
• Flores v. Meese
  934 F.2d 991· 9th Cir.· 1990-06-20 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The dissent argues that the INS regulations unconstitutionally deprive detained alien minors of their liberty, as the majority erred in applying a deferential standard of review and narrowly defining the constitutional right at stake.
• Meadows v. Legursky
  904 F.2d 903· 4th Cir.· 1990-06-01 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court affirmed the dismissal of Acord's petition, finding the state procedural bar adequate and independent, and reversed the grant of habeas relief to Meadows, remanding for dismissal due to failure to exhaust state remedies.
• E.W. v. Brown
  559 So. 2d 712· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-04-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the state must show good cause for the delay in commencing an adjudicatory hearing, not merely rely on the original grounds for detention, to justify extending a juvenile's detention beyond 21 days.
• Turney v. O'Toole
  898 F.2d 1470· 10th Cir.· 1990-03-26 ·cited 12×
  Officials executing a facially valid court order are absolutely immune from liability for the act of confinement, but only qualifiedly immune for the conditions of that confinement.
• Gamble v. Parsons
  898 F.2d 117· 10th Cir.· 1990-03-12 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  A habeas petitioner can challenge a current sentence enhanced by a prior, allegedly unconstitutional conviction, even if the prior conviction's sentence has expired.
• Arnulfo Mieles v. United States
  895 F.2d 887· 2d Cir.· 1990-02-06 ·cited 12×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  A federal prisoner is not entitled to credit against their sentence for time spent on bail prior to conviction and sentencing.
• LEE v. McCAUGHTRY
  892 F.2d 1318· 7th Cir.· 1990-01-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the admission of out-of-court accusations, offered to show the defendant's response and not for their truth, did not violate the Confrontation Clause, especially with a limiting instruction and prosecutor's argument consistent with that limitation.
• Lavin T. Balfour v. Haws
  892 F.2d 556· 7th Cir.· 1989-12-22 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding competency, ineffective assistance of counsel, missing photographs, and insufficient evidence did not warrant habeas corpus relief.
• Watson v. Estelle
  886 F.2d 1093· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the application of a later amendment to California's Determinate Sentencing Law, which allowed for parole hearings every three years instead of annually, did not violate the ex post facto clause because the law in effect at the time of the offense did not prov
• Brooks v. Jones
  875 F.2d 30· 2d Cir.· 1989-05-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a habeas corpus petitioner need not exhaust state remedies if state court processes have been demonstrably ineffective due to neglect and delay.
• Anant Kumar Tripati v. United States Parole Comm'n
  872 F.2d 328· 9th Cir.· 1989-04-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Sentencing Reform Act's repeal of the statute allowing deviation from parole guidelines did not apply to individuals convicted before the repeal's effective date, and thus did not invalidate the Parole Commission's decision.
• Rawls v. State
  540 So. 2d 946· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-04-12 ·cited 12×
  Jake Rawls petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus to challenge a trial court's refusal to reduce his bail from $20,000 for drug possession charges. The Florida appellate court held that while bond schedules serve a valid purpose, courts must conduct individualized case-by-case as
• J.B. Parker v. State
  542 So. 2d 356· Fla.· 1989-03-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court properly denied the motion for postconviction relief and the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, affirming the denial.
• Ross v. Petsock George
  868 F.2d 639· 3d Cir.· 1989-02-28 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court should remand the case to the district court for reconsideration of the ineffective assistance of counsel claim, as the district court failed to review the state record to determine if the claim was fairly presented.
• Stringer v. Jackson
  862 F.2d 1108· 5th Cir.· 1988-12-22 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of prosecutorial misconduct, erroneous jury instructions, and ineffective assistance of counsel were either procedurally barred or without merit, affirming the denial of the writ of habeas corpus.
• Filiberto Ojeda Rios v. Wigen
  863 F.2d 196· 2d Cir.· 1988-11-29 ·cited 12×
  A prior lengthy pretrial detention does not automatically render subsequent pretrial detention on new charges unlawful, even if the conduct was known previously.
• York v. Tate
  858 F.2d 322· 6th Cir.· 1988-09-28 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The Sixth Circuit held that the Ohio common law rule requiring circumstantial evidence to be irreconcilable with any reasonable theory of innocence should not be applied by federal courts in habeas corpus proceedings reviewing state criminal convictions. The federal constitutiona
• Giarratano v. Murray
  847 F.2d 1118· 4th Cir.· 1988-06-03 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court, in a concurring opinion, expresses doubt about the plaintiffs' standing to prosecute their case due to the consistent provision of counsel in state post-conviction proceedings.
• Walker v. J.O. Davis
  840 F.2d 834· 11th Cir.· 1988-03-23 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the prosecutor's conduct in acting as both witness and advocate, combined with the lack of overwhelming evidence, rendered the trial fundamentally unfair, thus meeting the standard for federal habeas review despite the procedural default.
• Ewing v. Rodgers
  826 F.2d 967· 10th Cir.· 1987-08-19 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that habeas corpus actions arising from criminal confinement are not 'civil actions' within the meaning of the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), and thus attorney's fees cannot be awarded under it.
• Farese v. Story
  823 F.2d 975· 6th Cir.· 1987-07-21 ·cited 12×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the Sentencing Reform Act's amendments do not apply retroactively to the petitioner's sentence and that the Act's provisions for parole determination are not yet effective for him.
• Thompson v. Lynaugh
  821 F.2d 1080· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-07 ·cited 12×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a federal court must deny habeas relief due to procedural default, even if the state court considered the merits of the claim, absent a showing of cause and prejudice.
• Earnest Lee Miller v. Dugger
  820 F.2d 1135· 11th Cir.· 1987-06-12 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court reinstated its prior ruling in Miller v. Wainwright, finding that the Supreme Court's decision in Pennsylvania v. Ritchie supports the need for in camera review of grand jury testimony.
• United States v. Aiello
  814 F.2d 109· 2d Cir.· 1987-03-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in summarily denying the appellants' motion for a new trial without a hearing, as their affidavits raised genuine issues of material fact regarding conflicts of interest. The court affirmed the denial of Scaduto's motion to correct his
• Young v. Simmons
  506 So. 2d 434· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-02-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the trial court had jurisdiction, the dismissal was proper because the factual allegations did not establish grounds for a writ of habeas corpus.
• Ortega v. O.L. McCOTTER
  808 F.2d 406· 5th Cir.· 1987-01-23 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that while some prosecutorial remarks were improper, they did not render the trial so fundamentally unfair as to deny due process, and thus habeas corpus relief was not warranted.
• Jarrett v. Headley
  802 F.2d 34· 2d Cir.· 1986-09-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in finding the pretrial identification procedures impermissibly suggestive, and therefore reversed the grant of the writ of habeas corpus.
• Wojtczak v. Fulcomer
  800 F.2d 353· 3d Cir.· 1986-09-09 ·cited 12×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  Inordinate delay by the state in processing post-conviction relief can excuse the federal habeas corpus exhaustion requirement.
• Harllel B. Jones v. Shankland
  800 F.2d 77· 6th Cir.· 1986-09-02 ·cited 12×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the appellant's civil rights claims were time-barred by the applicable one-year statute of limitations and that county prosecutors were absolutely immune from suit.
• Bermudez v. Smith
  797 F.2d 108· 2d Cir.· 1986-08-11 ·cited 12×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that an order dismissing some but not all claims in a habeas corpus petition is not a final order and thus not immediately appealable.
• Bowden v. Kemp
  793 F.2d 273· 11th Cir.· 1986-06-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the petitioner abused the writ by failing to raise his discriminatory jury selection claim in prior habeas petitions.
• United States v. Thieret
  791 F.2d 543· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-23 ·cited 12×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the district court correctly denied federal habeas corpus relief on Fourth and Fifth Amendment claims and that the prosecutor's remarks did not render the trial fundamentally unfair.
• Thomas v. Louie L. Wainwright
  486 So. 2d 574· Fla.· 1986-04-07 ·cited 12×
  Daniel Morris Thomas, a death row inmate, petitioned for habeas corpus claiming unconstitutional jury selection procedures in his capital murder trial. The Florida Supreme Court denied the petition, finding that Thomas waived his right to challenge the jury selection process by f
• Stawicki v. Thomas Israel & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Wis.
  778 F.2d 380· 7th Cir.· 1985-12-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a subsequent confession made after proper Miranda warnings is not automatically suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree, even if initial on-street questioning violated Miranda, provided the confession itself was voluntary. The court also found the waiver of
• Amadeo v. Kemp
  773 F.2d 1141· 11th Cir.· 1985-09-27 ·cited 12×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the case must be remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine if the petitioner had sufficient cause to overcome a procedural default in challenging jury composition.
• Allerd Sharlow v. Israel
  767 F.2d 373· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the exclusion of hearsay testimony did not violate the petitioner's Sixth Amendment right to present a defense because the testimony was not critical or reliable.
• Norman v. O.L. McCOTTER
  765 F.2d 504· 5th Cir.· 1985-07-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the district court erred in converting a motion to dismiss to summary judgment without notice, the error was harmless. The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no reversible error in the petitioner's claims.
• Riner v. Owens
  764 F.2d 1253· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-14 ·cited 12×
  The majority holds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient cause and prejudice to overcome waiver of his Sixth Amendment claim. The dissenting judge would hold that the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice and thus the claim should be denied.