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

• In the Interest of A.B.
  553 So. 2d 1349· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-12-20 ·cited 4×
  Sixteen consolidated petitions for writ of mandamus challenge the detention of juveniles beyond the five-day statutory period before placement into commitment programs. The court held that Florida Statute § 959.12 is mandatory and requires release of juveniles held in secure dete
• Caesar Harmason v. Smith
  888 F.2d 1527· 5th Cir.· 1989-12-01 ·cited 4×
  A guilty plea is not rendered involuntary by an attorney's prediction of a lesser sentence if the defendant affirms in open court that no promises were made and understands the potential maximum sentence.
• Medeiros v. Shimoda
  889 F.2d 819· 9th Cir.· 1989-11-08 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The dissent argues that the presumption that an initial confession has a coercive effect on subsequent confessions was not rebutted in this case.
• United States v. Bayard Spector
  888 F.2d 583· 8th Cir.· 1989-11-03 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  A motion for a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, based on newly discovered evidence, must be filed within two years of the appellate court's mandate issuance, and release on bond does not constitute a stay of the mandate.
• AMI Anclote Manor Hosp. v. State
  553 So. 2d 199· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-10-25 ·cited 4×
  The State Attorney, Public Defender, and HRS lack standing under section 394.459(10) to file a habeas corpus petition on behalf of patients who did not authorize the action.
• Smith v. Jago
  888 F.2d 399· 6th Cir.· 1989-10-20 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The Sixth Circuit held that the district court erred by failing to defer to state court findings of fact and by applying an improper standard of prejudice. The court found the state court's factual determinations were supported by the record and that the defendant failed to demon
• Tijerina v. Thornburgh
  884 F.2d 861· 5th Cir.· 1989-10-05 ·cited 4×
  The Parole Commission has the ultimate discretion to decide whether a parole violator term runs concurrently or consecutively with a new sentence, even if the sentencing judge recommends concurrent service.
• Dick v. Scroggy
  882 F.2d 192· 6th Cir.· 1989-08-14 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The appearance of impropriety from a prosecutor representing a victim in a civil suit while also prosecuting the defendant in a criminal case does not, without more, violate the Due Process Clause.
• Flittie v. Solem
  882 F.2d 325· 8th Cir.· 1989-08-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a petition attacking a fully served prior conviction, even if used for sentence enhancement, does not establish subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(a) because the petitioner is not in custody pursuant to that prior conviction.
• Hamblen v. Dugger
  719 F. Supp. 1051· M.D. Fla.· 1989-07-10 ·cited 4×
  The court denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and the motion for a stay of execution, finding no merit in the petitioner's claims of error.
• Duttry v. Scip Superintendent Petsock & The Attorney Gen. of the Commonwealth of Pa.
  878 F.2d 123· 3d Cir.· 1989-06-29 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a district court should obtain the state court record before dismissing a habeas petition for failure to exhaust state remedies, especially when the petitioner demonstrates a good faith effort to acquire the records but is unable to do so.
• Franzen v. Brinkman
  877 F.2d 26· 9th Cir.· 1989-06-08 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  Errors in a state post-conviction review process are not grounds for federal habeas corpus relief.
• Tague v. Puckett
  874 F.2d 1013· 5th Cir.· 1989-06-08 ·cited 4×
  A state must provide an indigent defendant with a transcript of prior proceedings when needed for an effective defense, and counsel's memory or trial notes are not adequate alternatives.
• Lopez-Torres v. United States
  876 F.2d 4· 1st Cir.· 1989-06-01 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that while the defendant may have raised a triable factual dispute regarding waiver of his right to appeal, the appeal would have lacked merit, thus affirming the denial of the § 2255 motion.
• J.F. v. Johnson
  543 So. 2d 471· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-05-31 ·cited 4×
  The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is granted because the child was detained in contravention of section 39.032, Florida Statutes, and the State conceded the child should be released.
• Swift v. Lynn
  870 F.2d 1039· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-26 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the denial of habeas relief on the sufficiency of the evidence claim was affirmed, but the denial of relief on the multiple offender adjudication claim was reversed and remanded.
• Neal v. The State OF Tex.
  870 F.2d 312· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-19 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the prisoner's constitutional rights to counsel and due process were not violated by the trial court's denial of a continuance or the forced proceeding to trial pro se, and that the evidence was sufficient for conviction.
• Ferenc v. Dugger
  867 F.2d 1301· 11th Cir.· 1989-03-15 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The doctrine of collateral estoppel does not preclude the State from using evidence previously suppressed on Fourth Amendment grounds in a subsequent, unrelated criminal action if the suppressed evidence was not essential to the defendant's conviction in the prior proceeding.
• Gilmore v. Armontrout
  867 F.2d 1179· 8th Cir.· 1989-02-21 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
• Thompson v. Jones
  870 F.2d 432· 8th Cir.· 1988-10-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's double jeopardy claim was without merit and thus not a substantial constitutional issue, affirming the denial of the habeas corpus petition.
• Sanders v. Clarke
  856 F.2d 1134· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-12 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a defendant is not required to show prejudice to obtain relief when counsel fails to comply with the Anders requirements for withdrawing from a frivolous appeal.
• Gunn v. Lanson Newsome
  851 F.2d 1294· 11th Cir.· 1988-08-08 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
• Woods v. Butler
  847 F.2d 1163· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-28 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  A valid prescription for a controlled substance is a defense, not an element of the crime of possession, and the state may constitutionally require the defendant to prove this defense.
• Catarino Gonzales, Jr. v. Grammer
  848 F.2d 894· 8th Cir.· 1988-06-07 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the prior guilty pleas were not entered in accord with due process, as the defendant was not sufficiently informed of his constitutional rights to make an intelligent choice.
• Aiken v. Spalding
  841 F.2d 881· 9th Cir.· 1988-01-21 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the habeas petition must be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state remedies, as new evidence was presented that had not been considered by state courts.
• Pinson v. Morris
  830 F.2d 896· 8th Cir.· 1987-10-05 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the panel opinion's reasoning regarding Pinson's knowledge of his appellate rights was incongruous and that the state may have an obligation to explicitly inform indigent defendants of their appellate rights.
• Turner v. Henman
  829 F.2d 612· 7th Cir.· 1987-09-14 ·cited 4×
  A prisoner is not entitled to habeas corpus relief for the Parole Commission's failure to follow its own regulations unless that failure also violates a constitutional provision.
• Carter v. Lynaugh
  826 F.2d 408· 5th Cir.· 1987-09-10 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the inmate failed to demonstrate prejudice, a prerequisite for habeas relief, even if his guilty plea was not knowing and voluntary or his counsel was ineffective.
• Sahagian v. Dickey
  827 F.2d 90· 7th Cir.· 1987-08-14 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Proceedings
  The court held that a state is not constitutionally required to provide legal materials for discretionary appeals, but reversed the denial of damages for denial of access at Marion, remanding for further proceedings.
• Eddy Ray Messimer v. A.L. Lockhart
  822 F.2d 43· 8th Cir.· 1987-06-30 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the habeas corpus petition for abuse of the writ and procedural default, finding the appellant had adequate notice.
• Glass v. Hilton Butler
  820 F.2d 112· 5th Cir.· 1987-06-10 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the applicant failed to make a substantial showing of the denial of a federal right, thus denying the certificate of probable cause and dismissing the appeal.
• Agan v. Duggar
  508 So. 2d 11· Fla.· 1987-06-08 ·cited 4×
  James Agan, under a death warrant, petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus and a stay of execution. The Court denied both petitions, rejecting claims that the sentencing judge failed to consider nonstatutory mitigating circumstances and that appellate cou
• Sullivan v. State OF Minn.
  818 F.2d 664· 8th Cir.· 1987-05-12 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional error in the state court's evidentiary rulings or sufficiency of evidence determination.
• Hernandez v. State
  501 So. 2d 163· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-01-27 ·cited 4×
  Hernandez's appellate counsel failed to challenge a sentence imposed outside sentencing guidelines that lacked clear and convincing written reasons for departure. The court granted his habeas corpus petition for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel and remanded for resente
• In re Extradition OF Robert Henry Russell. United States v. Russell
  805 F.2d 1215· 5th Cir.· 1986-12-10 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the magistrate had jurisdiction, the offense was within the treaty, and there was sufficient evidence for probable cause to believe the accused was guilty, thus affirming the denial of bail and habeas corpus relief.
• Ruiz v. A.L. Lockhart
  806 F.2d 158· 8th Cir.· 1986-11-20 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that while the convictions were valid, the death sentences were unconstitutional because an aggravating circumstance duplicated an element of the underlying capital crime. The court also held that the ruling in Collins v. Lockhart should apply retroactively.
• Davis v. Blackburn
  803 F.2d 1371· 5th Cir.· 1986-11-10 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  A federal court is not foreclosed from sua sponte applying the principle of Stone v. Powell when the petitioner has had a full and fair hearing on their Fourth Amendment claim in state court.
• Duffy v. Foltz
  804 F.2d 50· 6th Cir.· 1986-10-23 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a defendant's counsel's concession of factual guilt to pursue an insanity defense does not violate the right to a jury trial or due process, and that sanity is not an element of the crimes under Michigan law.
• Hunt v. M.L. Woodson
  800 F.2d 416· 4th Cir.· 1986-09-11 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The dissenting judge believes the majority opinion incorrectly reversed the district court's judgment.
• Smith v. Louie L. Wainwright
  799 F.2d 1442· 11th Cir.· 1986-09-08 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of a writ of habeas corpus, finding that the defendant was deprived of critical evidence due to the state's failure to disclose prior inconsistent statements of a key witness.
• Myrick v. Herb Maschner & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Kan.
  799 F.2d 642· 10th Cir.· 1986-08-29 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a constitutionally deficient jury instruction regarding intent was harmless error because the evidence overwhelmingly established the petitioner's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the instruction did not affect the verdict. The court also held that the pet
• Red Martin Cain v. Petrovsky
  798 F.2d 1194· 8th Cir.· 1986-08-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction under § 2241 to grant relief for violations of state law or state speedy trial provisions, and that jail time served in connection with a dropped federal charge is not creditable against a federal sentence for unrelated offense
• Daniel v. Warden, State Corr. Inst. AT Huntingdon, PA. & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Pa. Appeal of John Robert Daniel
  794 F.2d 880· 3d Cir.· 1986-07-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying the presumption of correctness under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d) to the state court's determination of the double jeopardy claim, but affirmed the denial of the writ because the double jeopardy claim lacked merit.
• Black v. State
  490 So. 2d 1287· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-06-18 ·cited 4×
• Seccia v. Louie L. Wainwright
  487 So. 2d 1156· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-04-23 ·cited 4×
  Richard Seccia appeals the dismissal of his habeas corpus petition, which was filed by a fellow inmate acting as his "next friend." The court reversed the dismissal, holding that habeas corpus petitions may be filed by a friend or agent on behalf of a detained person, and that co
• Funchess v. Louie L. Wainwright
  486 So. 2d 592· Fla.· 1986-04-17 ·cited 4×
  David Livingston Funchess petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus and stay of execution following his 1975 conviction for two counts of first-degree murder. The Florida Supreme Court denied both requests, holding that Funchess's challenge to death-qualified juries was procedurally
• Reed Wayne Hamilton v. Crispus NIX
  781 F.2d 619· 8th Cir.· 1985-12-31 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The dissenting judge argues that the Iowa Supreme Court's findings regarding the independent source doctrine should be presumed correct under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), and that the majority improperly disregarded these findings.
• Watson v. Marshall
  784 F.2d 722· 6th Cir.· 1985-12-26 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The dissenting judge believes the prosecutor's actions and defense counsel's inactions deprived the appellant of a fair trial, warranting a retrial or release.
• Ashford v. Edwards
  780 F.2d 405· 4th Cir.· 1985-12-17 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  Convicting a defendant of two counts of attempted armed robbery is not a violation of the federal double jeopardy clause when the evidence shows threats and demands made to two separate victims, even if the property sought belonged to a partnership.
• Abelino Rodriguez v. Ricketts
  777 F.2d 527· 9th Cir.· 1985-12-02 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the Due Process Clause does not require state courts to establish a factual basis for a guilty plea absent special circumstances, and that no conflict of interest affected the adequacy of appellate representation.