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

• Schaeffer v. Black
  774 F.2d 865· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-01 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a habeas petitioner claiming ineffective assistance of counsel due to external constraints must still demonstrate actual prejudice, and that state court factual findings are entitled to a presumption of correctness.
• Ervin Devere Ellison v. Sachs
  769 F.2d 955· 4th Cir.· 1985-08-02 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding the admission of the child victim's hearsay statements violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses.
• Barton v. A.L. Lockhart
  762 F.2d 712· 8th Cir.· 1985-05-22 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  A defendant is denied due process when a sentencing judge relies on materially false information in a presentence report and the defendant lacks a meaningful opportunity to rebut the inaccuracies.
• Brownstein v. Dir., Ill. Dep't OF Corr.
  760 F.2d 836· 7th Cir.· 1985-04-30 ·cited 4×
  A federal court may deny habeas relief based on a petitioner's "deliberate bypass" of state procedures, even if no procedural default occurred under state law, when the petitioner strategically sought an unentitled benefit.
• Fisher v. Rose
  757 F.2d 789· 6th Cir.· 1985-03-26 ·cited 4×
  The district court abused its discretion by barring retrial based on the state's delay in retrying the petitioner, as the petitioner was no longer held under the constitutionally defective conviction.
• Corcoran v. Wyrick
  757 F.2d 207· 8th Cir.· 1985-03-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a state court's factual finding regarding a habeas petitioner's understanding of potential punishment is presumed correct under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d), and an erroneous statement by the sentencing judge does not invalidate a guilty plea if the petitioner was othe
• Frye v. Procunier
  746 F.2d 1011· 4th Cir.· 1984-10-18 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court's concurrence rests on binding precedent regarding ineffective assistance of counsel, despite the judge's personal view on the impropriety of the jury instruction.
• Linwood E. Briley v. E.L. Booker
  746 F.2d 225· 4th Cir.· 1984-10-09 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding the petitioner abused the writ by raising new issues in a successive petition and that the claims lacked merit.
• In the Interest of M.S.
  455 So. 2d 557· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-08-27 ·cited 4×
  The court reviewed a habeas corpus petition concerning a child's dependency adjudication, finding the petition procedurally flawed but suggesting mandamus to compel an evidentiary hearing due to delays and lack of proper procedure.
• Amrut Narandas Patel v. Landon
  739 F.2d 1455· 9th Cir.· 1984-08-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's departure and return on advance parole did not strip him of his right to deportation proceedings, and his status must be adjudicated accordingly.
• Austad v. Risley
  739 F.2d 428· 9th Cir.· 1984-07-31 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the district court correctly denied habeas corpus relief, as the state court's findings on mental fitness and impartiality of the jury were entitled to deference.
• Cooley v. Crispus NIX
  738 F.2d 345· 8th Cir.· 1984-07-09 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  Defense counsel's failure to interview alibi witnesses was not ineffective assistance of counsel when the defendant indicated the witnesses would not help or would harm his case.
• Gomez v. McKASKLE
  734 F.2d 1107· 5th Cir.· 1984-06-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice from counsel's alleged failures, thus not meeting the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel.
• United States ex rel. Ronald C. Huckstead v. Greer
  737 F.2d 673· 7th Cir.· 1984-06-19 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the appellant did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel and that the omission of a jury instruction regarding the state's burden to disprove self-defense did not rise to the level of plain error or prejudice sufficient for federal habeas relief.
• United States ex rel. Gary Paul Karr v. Wolff
  732 F.2d 615· 7th Cir.· 1984-04-26 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the district court erred in applying the Supreme Court's decision in Edwards v. Arizona retroactively to conduct that occurred before Edwards was decided. The case is remanded for reconsideration under the appropriate pre-Edwards legal standard.
• J.B. v. Lumpee
  450 So. 2d 1286· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-03-22 ·cited 4×
• United States ex rel. Theodore Bacon v. DeROBERTIS
  728 F.2d 874· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-17 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment, holding that any prosecutorial misconduct before the grand jury was remedied by a fair trial, and the failure to give a lesser included offense instruction did not constitute a fundamental miscarriage of justice.
• Austin v. McKASKLE
  724 F.2d 1153· 5th Cir.· 1984-02-13 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a federal habeas petitioner is entitled to an evidentiary hearing if they did not receive a full and fair evidentiary hearing in state court, especially when facts regarding a potential Brady violation are in dispute.
• Houston v. Bryan
  725 F.2d 516· 9th Cir.· 1984-02-08 ·cited 4×
  Noncompliance with local rules regarding oral argument on summary judgment motions is not reversible error absent a showing of prejudice. The state defendants' failure to prevent a witness's detention or secure release was not the proximate cause of the detention under Nevada law
• Howard v. Wyrick
  720 F.2d 993· 8th Cir.· 1983-11-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate cause for his procedural default because his 1979 counsel's investigation into his claimed innocence met the constitutional standard for effective assistance.
• Murrell Toby Hockenbury, III v. Sowders
  718 F.2d 155· 6th Cir.· 1983-09-26 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court should affirm the district court's grant of habeas corpus, as the prosecution's use of the petitioner's post-arrest silence for impeachment violated due process.
• Futrell v. Wyrick
  716 F.2d 1207· 8th Cir.· 1983-09-15 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the admission of mugshots, even if potentially prejudicial, did not rise to the level of a due process violation requiring habeas corpus relief.
• Asper v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  709 F.2d 356· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-11 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the state trial judge's refusal to credit the petitioner's testimony regarding his indigency was not constitutional error, and thus federal habeas relief was properly denied.
• Payne v. Janasz
  711 F.2d 1305· 6th Cir.· 1983-06-22 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that the cumulative effect of trial errors, including the injection of an unnecessary 'lawful seizure' element and the admission of unreliable hearsay, rendered the trial fundamentally unfair and a denial of due process.
• Harrisson v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n
  428 So. 2d 388· Fla. 4th DCA· 1983-03-23 ·cited 4×
• Kelly v. Warden, House OF Correction
  701 F.2d 311· 4th Cir.· 1983-03-03 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the district court erred in placing the burden of proof on the petitioner to show harm from counsel's incompetence, rather than on the state to show the error was harmless.
• Minor v. Lucas
  697 F.2d 697· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-07 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The court held that a federal habeas petitioner must present constitutional claims to state courts in a constitutional framework, not just state law grounds, to satisfy the exhaustion requirement.
• Bronson Howard Knight v. Johnson
  699 F.2d 162· 4th Cir.· 1983-01-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the state trial court's procedure of accepting guilty pleas under protest and then proceeding to hear evidence to determine guilt did not violate due process or the right to effective assistance of counsel.
• Grimsley v. Dodson
  696 F.2d 303· 4th Cir.· 1982-12-15 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule does not apply to state probation revocation hearings when the state has provided an opportunity for full and fair litigation of the Fourth Amendment claim.
• Smith v. Wyrick
  693 F.2d 808· 8th Cir.· 1982-12-01 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that a federal court must grant an evidentiary hearing on a habeas petition if relevant facts are in dispute and a fair hearing was not granted in state court, but affirmed the denial because the petitioner's claim could be resolved on the record.
• Andiarena v. Keohane
  691 F.2d 993· 11th Cir.· 1982-11-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that successive prosecutions for firearms and drug offenses did not violate the Fifth Amendment's prohibition against double jeopardy or due process rights.
• Epps v. Louie L. Wainwright
  420 So. 2d 659· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-10-20 ·cited 4×
  The court granted the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, allowing the petitioner to proceed with a delayed appeal.
• Remer J. Dasher v. Stripling
  685 F.2d 385· 11th Cir.· 1982-09-07 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that a defendant's physical inability to attend trial, without waiver, requires reversal of a conviction obtained in absentia.
• Avera v. State
  417 So. 2d 804· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-08-04 ·cited 4×
  Avera petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus seeking delayed appellate review after his assistant public defender failed to timely file a notice of appeal. The court granted the petition, holding that ineffective assistance of counsel excuses strict compliance with the 30-day app
• Carpenter v. Leibson
  683 F.2d 169· 6th Cir.· 1982-07-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that due process prohibits the retroactive application of a new procedural rule (Kimbrough) that bars substantive review of convictions when petitioners complied with prior procedural requirements.
• Ramirez v. Jones
  683 F.2d 712· 2d Cir.· 1982-06-30 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  A petitioner's failure to object at trial does not preclude federal habeas review if the state appellate court considered the merits, but the failure to object remains a factor in the federal court's analysis.
• Donnie McDONALD v. Lucas
  677 F.2d 518· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-04 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the petitioner's course of conduct, including limited answers to questions after refusing to sign a Miranda waiver, did not constitute an implied waiver of his Miranda rights.
• United States v. Wyrick
  675 F.2d 161· 8th Cir.· 1982-04-02 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the appellant failed to establish a prima facie violation of the Constitution's fair cross-section requirement due to the exclusion of women from jury venires.
• Langone v. Smith
  682 F.2d 287· 2d Cir.· 1982-03-19 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court, in a dissenting opinion, argues that the denial of rehearing en banc was improper because the case presents significant issues regarding the standard for ineffective assistance of counsel and the review of jury instructions under Sandstrom v. Montana.
• Angel v. Overberg
  664 F.2d 1052· 6th Cir.· 1981-11-25 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
• Yancey v. Housewright
  664 F.2d 187· 8th Cir.· 1981-11-19 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, prosecutorial misconduct, and insufficient evidence did not warrant habeas corpus relief.
• United States v. Moore
  656 F.2d 378· 8th Cir.· 1981-08-25 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The appellate court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition and recusal motion, finding no merit in the appellant's arguments.
• United States v. Cabrera-Quintero
  650 F.2d 942· 8th Cir.· 1981-06-12 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The court held that the validity of the original deportation order is not a matter that can be raised under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
• Pfaff v. Wells
  648 F.2d 689· 10th Cir.· 1981-05-06 ·cited 4×·via Federal Habeas Corpus
  The pendency of a federal habeas corpus proceeding in the demanding state does not justify granting relief in a federal habeas proceeding in the asylum state to bar extradition.
• Arnold v. Wyrick
  646 F.2d 1225· 8th Cir.· 1981-04-10 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus, affirming the denial of relief.
• Rooks E. Crawford v. Fenton
  646 F.2d 810· 3d Cir.· 1981-03-27 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Review
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's grant of habeas corpus, finding that the trial judge's declaration of a mistrial violated the petitioner's double jeopardy rights by failing to consider alternatives.
• Fletcher v. Warden, United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, Kansas
  641 F.2d 850· 10th Cir.· 1981-02-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that one appeal was moot due to the prisoner's return to state custody, another was barred by failure to exhaust state remedies, and the third was affirmed based on prior precedent interpreting 18 U.S.C. § 5003(a).
• McPHERSON v. Barksdale
  640 F.2d 780· 6th Cir.· 1981-02-11 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  Even if a state prosecutor breaches a plea bargain, federal courts cannot grant specific performance via habeas corpus if the petitioner has abandoned state remedies for breach.
• Chavis v. Henderson
  638 F.2d 534· 2d Cir.· 1980-12-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the victim's identification of the suspect was sufficiently reliable under the totality of the circumstances to meet due process requirements.
• McGEE v. Estelle
  632 F.2d 476· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-08 ·cited 4×·via Habeas Corpus Relief
  The court held that the appellant was not denied his right to counsel at the pre-trial lineup and that the identification testimony was reliable.