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
-
The court held that it never had jurisdiction over the original habeas petition because the 'next friend' did not establish standing, rendering a Rule 60(b) motion unnecessary and unavailable.
-
The court held that federal courts lack jurisdiction to review the substantive decisions of the Parole Commission for abuse of discretion, except for violations of the Parole Act or the Constitution.
-
902 F.2d 822·
11th Cir.·
1990-06-04
·cited 2×
Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights. A single intermediate appellate court decision construing a statute is insufficient to establish clarity for qualified immunity purpos
-
A defendant seeking due process relief for preindictment delay must prove actual prejudice, after which the court balances the prejudice against the government's justification for the delay.
-
The court held that one claim was exhausted and meritorious, while the remaining six ineffective assistance of counsel claims were unexhausted. The court affirmed dismissal of unexhausted claims and dismissal of the exhausted claim on its merits.
-
901 F.2d 64·
5th Cir.·
1990-05-15
·cited 2×
The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Arizona v. Roberson, which prohibited further interrogation after a suspect invokes the right to counsel, announced a "new rule" and therefore does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review where the conviction was f
-
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, finding no constitutional violation regarding the change of venue and no ineffective assistance of counsel.
-
559 So. 2d 1276·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1990-04-18
·cited 2×
Eddie Collins sought habeas corpus relief as a pretrial detainee challenging the adequacy of his court-appointed counsel. The Florida appellate court dismissed his appeal, holding that habeas corpus is not the proper remedy for challenging counsel's representation and that such c
-
The court held that while New York law likely warranted a justification charge based on the evidence of an accidental shooting during a struggle, the omission of such a charge did not violate due process because it would not have affected the jury's verdict.
-
560 So. 2d 248·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1990-03-06
·cited 2×
The court held that a complaint sworn before a magistrate satisfies the statutory requirement for an authenticated affidavit in extradition demands, and the asylum state cannot re-examine the demanding state's probable cause determination.
-
A federal habeas corpus petitioner who escapes from state prison and commits crimes in another state, thereby preventing the state courts from having a full and fair opportunity to consider his claims, has not exhausted state remedies.
-
556 So. 2d 498·
Fla. 1st DCA·
1990-02-06
·cited 2×
The denial of the petition for writ of habeas corpus is affirmed because the appellant failed to state a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel.
-
The court held that a petitioner's pro se status on a prior habeas petition does not, by itself, warrant relitigation of a claim already decided on the merits.
-
553 So. 2d 317·
Fla. 1st DCA·
1989-12-04
·cited 2×
C.S., a juvenile detained for 21 days, challenged his continued detention after the state filed an information charging him as an adult. The court held that a juvenile must be brought before a criminal court judge within 24 hours of an information filing, and that continued deten
-
555 So. 2d 1248·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1989-11-15
·cited 2×
A juvenile committed to HRS petitioned for a writ of mandamus to compel HRS to comply with Florida law requiring placement in a commitment program within five days of commitment, rather than remaining in detention indefinitely. The appellate court granted the petition, holding th
-
555 So. 2d 1246·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1989-11-15
·cited 2×
A juvenile committed to HRS sought a writ of mandamus to compel HRS to comply with Florida's statutory requirement to place committed juveniles in a commitment program within five days of commitment, rather than keeping them in detention. The court granted the petition, holding t
-
The Parole Commission did not abuse its discretion in using unconvicted murders to increase the appellant's offense severity rating, as there was sufficient evidence to establish a nexus between the murders and his racketeering and extortion offenses.
-
888 F.2d 713·
10th Cir.·
1989-11-02
·cited 2×
The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the magistrate's finding of probable cause for extradition on charges of theft by deception and forgery, and that the dual criminality requirement was satisfied.
-
886 F.2d 295·
11th Cir.·
1989-09-29
·cited 2×
The court held that the exclusion of persons aged eighteen to twenty-five and blacks from jury selection did not violate the Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial.
-
The court held that the suspect's confession was not the product of interrogation requiring full Miranda warnings because he initiated the conversation and the statements were volunteered.
-
The court held that the appellant had not exhausted his state remedies because his claims were not fairly presented to the state courts.
-
The court denied the petition for rehearing, finding the record insufficient to support a claim based on Penry v. Lynaugh, despite the Supreme Court's decision potentially impacting prior circuit precedent.
-
The court held that immigration officials abused their discretion by denying a stay of deportation when the alien raised a non-frivolous legal challenge to a statute that had not been decided by the circuit or Supreme Court.
-
The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the habeas petition, finding that grounds for relief were either procedurally barred due to failure to demonstrate cause and prejudice, or without merit.
-
The court held that the prisoner's federal constitutional claims are procedurally barred because the state's highest court relied on an independent and adequate state procedural ground (unreasonable delay in filing habeas petition) to deny relief.
-
The court held that Lewis is entitled to good time credit earned after the district court's 1982 finding that he could not benefit from YCA treatment. However, he is not entitled to relief for the period preceding that finding.
-
A defendant sentenced under a statute that does not apply to his crime, and which was not in effect at the time of the offense, is deprived of liberty without due process of law.
-
866 F.2d 399·
11th Cir.·
1989-02-23
·cited 2×
The court held that the district court improvidently granted the writ of habeas corpus because the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice from counsel's alleged deficient performance.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was not exhausted because the state appellate division likely affirmed on procedural grounds, not the merits of the underlying speedy trial claim.
-
-
865 F.2d 30·
2d Cir.·
1989-01-03
·cited 2×
Claims of deficiencies in a state grand jury proceeding are not cognizable in a federal habeas corpus proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 when a petit jury has subsequently convicted.
-
699 F. Supp. 1517·
M.D. Fla.·
1988-11-02
·cited 2×
The court denied the petition for writ of habeas corpus and motion for stay of execution, finding the claims without merit and, in some instances, an abuse of the writ.
-
Denying a criminal defendant the right to consult with counsel during a court recess violates the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
-
The court held that because sanity is not an element of the charged offenses under Michigan law, the petitioner's claims regarding the sufficiency of evidence and jury instructions on sanity do not present cognizable constitutional grounds for federal habeas corpus relief.
-
The court held that the admission of three invalid prior convictions was harmless error because the petitioner had sufficient valid prior convictions to support his persistent felony offender status, and thus, habeas relief was not warranted.
-
854 F.2d 830·
6th Cir.·
1988-08-05
·cited 2×
The court held that the Parole Commission's interpretation of its guidelines was reasonable and that the Regional Commissioner acted within her authority. However, the case is remanded to determine if the petitioner was properly notified of and given an opportunity to respond to
-
The court affirmed the denial of the petition, finding no merit in the claims of improper sentencing guidelines, ex post facto violation, or ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.
-
The court held that claims of error in state post-conviction proceedings cannot serve as a basis for federal habeas corpus relief, and a parole statute not creating a legitimate expectation of release does not implicate due process.
-
The court held that the petitioner's claim regarding jury instructions was procedurally barred because it was not raised on direct appeal, and even if considered on the merits, it would fail.
-
521 So. 2d 1103·
Fla.·
1988-03-14
·cited 2×
Willie Darden, a death row inmate with seven execution warrants signed, petitioned the Florida Supreme Court for habeas corpus relief and a stay of execution scheduled for March 15, 1988. The Court denied all relief, finding most claims procedurally barred because they should hav
-
840 F.2d 617·
8th Cir.·
1988-03-03
·cited 2×
The court held that the Nebraska state court retained jurisdiction over pending criminal matters despite the retrocession of jurisdiction to the federal government, and thus the habeas corpus application was properly denied.
-
520 So. 2d 112·
Fla. 1st DCA·
1988-02-22
·cited 2×
The court held that a contempt order for failure to pay child support must include an affirmative finding that the contemnor has the present ability to comply with the purge conditions.
-
A state prisoner's habeas corpus claim under Hicks v. Oklahoma requires showing either that the sentencing decision was not made by the proper authority or that the authority lacked knowledge of sentencing discretion, and that prejudice resulted; here, the sentence was within the
-
The court held that the defendant's counsel was not ineffective for failing to file a speedy trial motion because such a motion would have been denied, as the People exercised due diligence in apprehending the defendant.
-
The court held that sufficient evidence existed for a rational jury to find the petitioner guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, rejecting his entrapment defense.
-
836 F.2d 1076·
7th Cir.·
1988-02-01
·cited 2×
A district court's attempt to limit a certificate of probable cause to specific issues does not affect the appellate court's disposition of the petitioner's appeal.
-
837 F.2d 324·
8th Cir.·
1988-01-19
·cited 2×
The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the habeas corpus application because the appellant's guilty pleas were voluntary and his sentences did not violate the double jeopardy clause.
-
517 So. 2d 714·
Fla. 1st DCA·
1987-12-10
·cited 2×
Hansen appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging his 1983 parole revocation. The court affirmed the denial of most grounds but reversed the dismissal of constitutional challenges to the parole revocation statutes and the parole commission's authority, finding
-
833 F.2d 251·
11th Cir.·
1987-11-12
·cited 2×
The Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar retrial when prosecutorial misconduct was not intended to subvert the protections of the Clause.
-
513 So. 2d 1100·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1987-10-14
·cited 2×