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

• Kennedy v. Singletary
  599 So. 2d 991· Fla.· 1992-04-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally barred and affirmed the trial court's denial of relief.
• Williams v. Dixon
  961 F.2d 448· 4th Cir.· 1992-03-24 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
• Evans v. Court OF Common Pleas
  959 F.2d 1227· 3d Cir.· 1992-03-18 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a federal court may not grant habeas corpus relief before a state retrial when the prior conviction was reversed for trial error, as double jeopardy does not bar such a retrial. The court also found that the petitioner had adequately exhausted her federal due
• Baxter v. Gavin K. Letts
  592 So. 2d 1089· Fla.· 1992-02-06 ·cited 10×
  Florida Supreme Court vacated a district court decision that increased Baxter's sentence on the State's appeal because Baxter was denied his constitutional right to counsel during that appellate proceeding.
• Skelton v. Whitley
  950 F.2d 1037· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-06 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The Court of Appeals held that the Cage v. Louisiana decision announced a "new rule" of constitutional law and therefore could not be applied retroactively to Skelton's case on federal habeas review, as it did not fall within the exceptions to the Teague doctrine.
• Lafferty v. Cook
  949 F.2d 1546· 10th Cir.· 1991-12-09 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  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.
• Swafford v. Singletary
  584 So. 2d 5· Fla.· 1991-08-15 ·cited 10×
  The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is denied because the attorney's involvement was minimal and the petitioner could not have been prejudiced.
• Flores v. Meese
  942 F.2d 1352· 9th Cir.· 1991-08-09 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The INS policy of incarcerating children pending deportation hearings, rather than releasing them to responsible non-relative adults, flagrantly violates due process.
• Clark A. Bailey v. Gardebring
  940 F.2d 1150· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-26 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The dissent argues that the new Minnesota parole regulations constitute a law for ex post facto purposes because they are binding on the agency and lack discretion, unlike federal guidelines. The dissent would find the regulations violate the ex post facto clause.
• Taylor v. Whitley
  933 F.2d 325· 5th Cir.· 1991-06-13 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  A voluntary and intelligent guilty plea waives the right to collaterally attack convictions on double jeopardy grounds, unless the violation is apparent on the face of the indictment or record.
• Henderson v. Cohn
  919 F.2d 1270· 7th Cir.· 1990-12-11 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that a petitioner's failure to demonstrate cause and prejudice for a procedural default in state court bars federal habeas corpus review, and illiteracy does not constitute cause.
• Arlester E. Scott v. Jones
  915 F.2d 1188· 8th Cir.· 1990-10-03 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas relief, finding no constitutional error in the state court proceedings or convictions.
• Hays v. Johnson
  566 So. 2d 260· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-04-26 ·cited 10×
  A natural mother sought habeas corpus relief to obtain custody of her minor child from an attorney appointed as temporary custodian. The court denied the petition as meritless but used the occasion to sanction the mother's counsel for omitting material facts from the petition, in
• Spaziano v. Dugger
  557 So. 2d 1372· Fla.· 1990-03-15 ·cited 10×
  Joseph Robert Spaziano sought a writ of habeas corpus and appealed the denial of his third motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 in a death penalty case. The Florida Supreme Court, reviewing the case for the fifth time, affirmed the tria
• Frank C. Peterson (80-A-1720) v. Scully
  896 F.2d 661· 2d Cir.· 1990-02-07 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that a new Supreme Court rule requires federal courts to consider the merits of a habeas petition if the state appellate court's opinion does not clearly and expressly state that its judgment rests on a state procedural bar.
• Hendrix v. Lynaugh
  888 F.2d 336· 5th Cir.· 1989-11-16 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  A petitioner is not considered "in custody" for purposes of a habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 if the sentence for the conviction being attacked has fully expired at the time the petition is filed.
• Spain v. Rushen
  883 F.2d 712· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-22 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the trial judge's decision to shackle the defendant was not an abuse of discretion that denied due process, considering the specific security risks and the defendant's history.
• United States ex rel. Bernard Wandick v. James A. Chrans & Neil Hartigan
  869 F.2d 1084· 7th Cir.· 1989-03-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to a jury trial and that sufficient evidence supported his conviction.
• Nichols v. Sullivan
  867 F.2d 1250· 10th Cir.· 1989-02-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner's due process rights were not violated by witness testimony regarding prior incarceration or by the sentencing judge's alleged bias, and thus affirmed the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition.
• Hawkins v. Lynaugh
  862 F.2d 482· 5th Cir.· 1988-12-10 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court vacated the district court's ruling, declined to vacate the stay of execution, and remanded the case for further consideration of the habeas petition and the state's assertion of writ abuse.
• Ozzie K. Cheek v. United States
  858 F.2d 1330· 8th Cir.· 1988-10-11 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a defendant who knowingly and voluntarily waives his right to direct appeal as part of a cooperation agreement cannot later raise claims that could have been raised on direct appeal in a § 2255 motion.
• Graham v. Lynaugh
  854 F.2d 715· 5th Cir.· 1988-08-31 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the petitioner failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right and therefore denied his petition for a certificate of probable cause.
• Sparks v. Sowders
  852 F.2d 882· 6th Cir.· 1988-08-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim when alleging gross misadvice concerning parole eligibility that affected his guilty plea.
• Pratt v. D.J. McCARTHY
  850 F.2d 590· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-29 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that a misunderstanding among counsel regarding who would file a notice of appeal does not constitute excusable neglect under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(5).
• Lane T. Mele v. Fitchburg Dist. Court
  850 F.2d 817· 1st Cir.· 1988-06-15 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  An issue is not considered fairly presented to the state's highest court for exhaustion purposes unless the applicant has raised it within the application for further appellate review.
• Byrne v. Roemer
  847 F.2d 1130· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-13 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the prisoner was not entitled to a stay of execution because his section 1983 claim, based on the premise that a Louisiana statute unconstitutionally limited his federal right to seek Supreme Court review, lacked merit. The federal statute does not grant the a
• United States ex rel. Steve Shore v. O'Leary
  833 F.2d 663· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-09 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  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.
• Field v. Sheriff OF Wake Cnty.
  831 F.2d 530· 4th Cir.· 1987-10-23 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the presence of serious injury as a result of impaired driving is a sentencing factor, not an element of the offense, and therefore does not require a jury determination.
• James v. Butler
  827 F.2d 1006· 5th Cir.· 1987-09-04 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court denied James' application for a certificate of probable cause and dismissed his appeal, finding he failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right.
• Selvage v. Lynaugh
  823 F.2d 845· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-23 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the state court's conviction for capital murder and the resulting death sentence.
• Bolyea v. State
  508 So. 2d 457· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-05-27 ·cited 10×
  A probationer, whether or not incarcerated as a condition of probation, is considered 'in custody' for the purposes of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and may seek postconviction relief.
• Jairo E. Betancourt v. Willis
  814 F.2d 1546· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-20 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that ineffective assistance of counsel rendered the guilty plea involuntary, affirming the grant of habeas corpus relief.
• Nell v. Warden Charles James
  811 F.2d 100· 2d Cir.· 1987-01-30 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that the petitioner's second habeas petition was an abuse of the writ and that he failed to allege sufficient facts for his ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
• Wood v. A.L. Lockhart
  809 F.2d 457· 8th Cir.· 1987-01-07 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of trial error, including the admission of testimony, denial of a change of venue, failure to strike biased jurors, and prosecutorial comments, did not rise to the level of a due process violation warranting habeas corpus relief.
• Webb v. Keohane
  804 F.2d 413· 7th Cir.· 1986-10-30 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  A prisoner waives rights under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) anti-shuttling provision by requesting transfer to another facility, and failure to raise issues in state court constitutes a procedural default that federal habeas review cannot excuse without a showing o
• Nat'l Ctr. FOR Immigrants' Rights, Inc. v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  791 F.2d 1351· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-13 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that the Attorney General's statutory authority under the Immigration and Nationality Act to impose conditions on appearance and delivery bonds is limited to those conditions that ensure the alien's appearance at future proceedings, not conditions barring employmen
• Davis v. Blackburn
  789 F.2d 350· 5th Cir.· 1986-05-14 ·cited 10×
  A federal court need not grant an evidentiary hearing on a habeas petition if the alleged newly discovered evidence is discoverable by reasonable diligence and consists solely of a recanted trial witness affidavit rejected by the state trial court.
• Webb v. Blackburn
  773 F.2d 646· 5th Cir.· 1985-10-15 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the appellant's claims of prosecutorial misconduct regarding post-arrest silence and other crimes evidence were procedurally barred or harmless, and thus affirmed the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• Corn v. Kemp
  772 F.2d 681· 11th Cir.· 1985-09-16 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court vacated its prior decision affirming the denial of relief on burden-shifting jury instructions and remanded for the district court to grant the writ unless the state retries the petitioner.
• Miller v. Solem
  758 F.2d 144· 8th Cir.· 1985-04-04 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  A successive federal habeas petition cannot be dismissed as an abuse of the writ under Rule 9(b) unless the petitioner has been given a reasonable opportunity to explain why new grounds were not raised in prior petitions.
• United States ex rel. Hugh E. Thom v. O.C. Jenkins
  760 F.2d 736· 7th Cir.· 1985-03-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the petition for a writ of habeas corpus because the petitioner failed to meet his burden of producing evidence of present inability to pay the judgment, despite evidence of past ability.
• Woodard v. Sargent
  753 F.2d 694· 8th Cir.· 1985-01-31 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The Eighth Circuit held that the Grigsby rule, which concerns the impartiality of death-qualified juries on guilt, applies retroactively to cases like Woodard's and that his claim was not procedurally barred in state courts. Therefore, Woodard is entitled to a new trial before an
• Townsend v. Lucas
  745 F.2d 933· 5th Cir.· 1984-10-19 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The appeal is dismissed because the district court failed to enter a separate final judgment and the notice of appeal was untimely.
• Anderson v. Jones
  743 F.2d 306· 5th Cir.· 1984-10-09 ·cited 10×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the Andersons are entitled to an evidentiary hearing to determine the sentencing judge's understanding of his sentencing discretion.
• Walker v. Maggio
  738 F.2d 714· 5th Cir.· 1984-08-20 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  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.
• Blake v. Zant
  737 F.2d 925· 11th Cir.· 1984-07-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an order granting a writ of habeas corpus on some claims, but not all, is not a final appealable judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, nor is it an interlocutory injunction under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1).
• Allen v. Hadden
  738 F.2d 1102· 10th Cir.· 1984-07-10 ·cited 10×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the Parole Commission did not impermissibly "double-count" factors by using the same facts to determine offense severity and to justify a parole decision outside the guidelines, as the factors were related but distinct.
• Harvey and Rebecca Rumbaugh v. McKASKLE
  730 F.2d 291· 5th Cir.· 1984-04-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the pending state habeas petition filed by the prisoner necessitates a remand to monitor its progress before adjudicating the parents' appeal.
• Thomas v. ARN
  728 F.2d 813· 6th Cir.· 1984-03-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that failure to file objections to a magistrate's report, after being warned, results in a waiver of the right to appeal the district court's judgment.
• Benny Williams v. Kullman
  722 F.2d 1048· 2d Cir.· 1983-11-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while sua sponte dismissal of the habeas petition was procedurally improper, the petition should ultimately be dismissed on the merits because the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the jury's finding of intent.