245 results for 'cat:"Habeas"'.
J. Womack finds the circuit court properly denied the petition for habeas corpus. Defendant argues his rape conviction is illegal, claiming there are inconsistencies in the judgment and commitment order, as well as in the docket entries. The alleged inconsistences consist only of discrepancies in the offense date. Docket entries recorded by various court clerks have no bearing on the facial legality of a judgment or jurisdiction. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Womack , Filed On: May 9, 2024, Case #: CV-23-720, Categories: habeas, Sex Offender, Due Process
J. Webb finds the circuit court properly dismissed the inmate's petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The inmate alleges the trial court lacked jurisdiction because no record evidence shows he pleaded guilty to a charge of illegal firearm possession. The inmate was found guilty for first-degree murder and the sentencing order recited he pleaded guilty to the firearm charge, the shorter sentence for which is being served concurrently with that for the murder conviction. The petition is time-barred. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Webb, Filed On: May 9, 2024, Case #: CV-23-721, Categories: Firearms, habeas, Murder
J. Hudson finds the county court properly denied the inmate's petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Defendant was convicted for battery and committing a terroristic act for firing a weapon into an occupied vehicle, causing injury. Though sufficient evidence supports the convictions, defendant says the presiding special judge was not properly appointed, and also makes double jeopardy claims. Defendant offers no evidence the judge's appointment failed to comply with procedure, and a challenge to the appointment of a special judge is not cognizable in habeas proceedings. The acts of firing the weapon multiple times and the result of the victim being injured are legally separate charges, and double jeopardy does not apply. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Hudson , Filed On: May 9, 2024, Case #: CV-23-633, Categories: habeas, Battery, Terrorism
J. Aoyagi finds the trial court properly declined defendant's motion for a fee waiver to proceed with a habeas motion to vacate an older judgment. “Plaintiff sought a waiver of future fees and costs attendant to a potential motion to vacate a judgment entered five years earlier, and the court denied the motion on the grounds that the case was long closed.” Affirmed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Aoyagi, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: A180862, Categories: habeas
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Easterbrook finds that the lower court properly ordered Wisconsin to release defendant on bail unless it retries him on murder charges within two months. Defendant's attorney abandoned him in 1996 when he sought post-conviction relief, and the transcript of his trial was destroyed after 10 years. The Wisconsin Supreme Court held that holding a new trial in the absence of a transcript is appropriate only if defendant first makes a valid claim of prejudicial error, ignoring the fact that defendant trusted his attorney to get a the necessary transcript and effectively denying him an appeal for 28 years. "Wisconsin's treatment of Pope is a travesty of justice." Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Easterbrook, Filed On: May 6, 2024, Case #: 23-2894, Categories: Civil Rights, habeas
J. Soud finds defendant's habeas corpus petition to be released from his involuntary commitment subsequent to his being found guilty of first-degree homicide for the premeditated murder of his wife must be denied. Ample evidence in the record supports the conclusion that defendant's mental illness continues to make him a manifest danger to himself or others, so his petition will not be granted.
Court: Florida Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Soud, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: 24-0663, Categories: habeas, Murder, Commitment
Per curiam, the court of appeals finds the change in calculation of time served credits earned by inmates did not violate the inmate's constitutional rights under the ex post facto clause. The alteration was not a law, but was actually an administrative directive that does not implicate the constitution. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: AC46226, Categories: Ex Post Facto, habeas, Sentencing
J. Cradle finds the trial court did not violate the inmate's due process rights when it denied his motion for a continuance during his habeas trial. Although a crucial witness failed to appear, the inmate was able to present numerous exhibits and call other witnesses throughout the three day trial. Additionally, the absent witness had been served with multiple subpoenas and the trial court issued a capias in an attempt to force his appearance, and so there was no legitimate reason for a further delay. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Cradle, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: AC46237, Categories: Criminal Procedure, habeas, Due Process
J. Bright finds that while the attorney's failure to present evidence of the inmate's mental health issues at a hearing to determine whether good cause existed for the untimely filing of his habeas corpus petition may have constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, the inmate's failure to provide any evidence regarding the claim required dismissal of his appeal to this court.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Bright, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: AC43187, Categories: Evidence, habeas, Ineffective Assistance
J. Alvord finds the lower court properly dismissed the inmate's second habeas petition despite expert testimony that rebutted the state's conclusion the shooting victim died of a contact wound. Not only did the expert's testimony merely cast doubt on whether the victim had a gun pressed against his skin at the time of the shooting, but there was other, overwhelming evidence to convict the inmate, who failed to show any prejudice. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Alvord, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: AC46270, Categories: habeas, Ineffective Assistance, Experts
J. Powers finds the trial court erred in applying a “community standard of care” instead of the “deliberate indifference” standard applicable to a medical habeas claim. “The trial court’s reasoning does not address whether plaintiff suffered ‘unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain’ by prison officials” as required. Reversed.
Court: Oregon Court of Appeals, Judge: Powers, Filed On: May 1, 2024, Case #: A175798, Categories: habeas, Prisoners' Rights
J. Agee finds the lower court improperly rejected the inmate's request for a new trial on perjury charges. The inmate argued he deserved a new trial because his counsel was ineffective for failing to appeal erroneous jury instructions. The state agrees that counsel was ineffective on this issue and the inmate is entitled to a new trial. Reversed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Agee, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 22-6272, Categories: habeas, Ineffective Assistance, Jury Instructions
J. Wood finds that the lower court properly dismissed defendant's habeas petition challenging his conviction for murdering his wife. Defendant argues that his counsel was ineffective for failing to discover evidence that cast doubt on an expert witness's testimony against him. However, a state court already found defendant waived this claim by failing to raise it on direct appeal, and the state-court waiver means that he procedurally defaulted the claim for federal-court purposes as well. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Wood, Filed On: April 29, 2024, Case #: 23-2125, Categories: habeas, Ineffective Assistance, Experts
J. Cadish finds the district court properly granted defendant's petition for postconviction relief. Convicted for robbery and weapons charges as well as two counts of murder, defendant's counsel failed to present testimony to impeach his codefendants' testimony. Evidence showed defendant's attorneys received a letter from an inmate saying a codefendant admitted defendant did not kill the victims and the codefendant lied in order to receive a lenient sentence. Another statement from another codefendant characterizing defendant as a violent person was not described in the state's notice of intent to seek the death penalty or its notices of evidence in aggravation. Based on the omissions, counsel should have challenged the introduction of the evidence. Affirmed.
Court: Nevada Supreme Court, Judge: Cadish , Filed On: April 26, 2024, Case #: 83685, Categories: habeas, Ineffective Assistance, Murder
J. Panella finds that the lower court improperly granted defendant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus in this case over her assault of a Pennsylvania police officer who detained her because she assaulted him when he opened the door to her home. The police officer’s testimony showed there was probable cause to believe defendant had attempted injure the officer in the performance of his duty. Reversed.
Court: Pennsylvania Superior Court, Judge: Panella, Filed On: April 26, 2024, Case #: J-S05012-24, Categories: Criminal Procedure, habeas, Search
J. Elgo finds that while the Connecticut Supreme Court's decision in a prior case changed the implications of due process claims regarding in-court identifications, the lower court properly dismissed the inmate's habeas claim for ineffective assistance because the prior ruling did not apply retroactively and, therefore, his attorney could not raise the issue on appeal. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Elgo, Filed On: April 26, 2024, Case #: AC46059, Categories: habeas, Due Process, Identification
J. Cradle finds the lower court properly dismissed the inmate's petition for a writ of habeas corpus based on ineffective assistance of counsel. His attorney's decision not to call an identification evidence expert witness at trial was sound strategy based on the unreliability of such evidence, which likely would have been ruled inadmissible by the trial court. Additionally, while the attorney should have interviewed the alibi witness's children, who were also present when she allegedly dropped the inmate off at the scene of the crime, their potential testimony would have been cumulative and would not have changed the outcome of the trial because they were not present at the time of the shooting. Affirmed.
Court: Connecticut Court Of Appeals, Judge: Cradle, Filed On: April 19, 2024, Case #: AC45569, Categories: habeas, Ineffective Assistance, Robbery
J. Baker finds the circuit court improperly dismissed the inmate's request for additional DNA testing following his conviction in the "Memphis 3" murder. The circuit court misinterpreted the plain language of the relevant statute, consistent with other law, that “any person...who has alleged actual innocence” is entitled to petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The court erroneously dismissed the petition on the grounds defendant was not in state custody at the time it was filed. Reversed.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Baker , Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: CR-22-670, Categories: Dna, habeas, Murder
J. Kelsey grants the defendant's habeas petition and order his early release. A law passed in Virginia's legislature amended the earned-sentence credit program. Under the new early-release program, prisoners with qualifying convictions are eligible to receive credits at a higher rate of up to 15 days of credit for every 30 days served. The amendment specifically excludes those with murder convictions but not attempted murder convictions.
Court: Virginia Supreme Court, Judge: Kelsey , Filed On: April 18, 2024, Case #: 230514, Categories: habeas, Murder, Sentencing
J. Batchelder finds the lower court properly dismissed the inmate's habeas petition as untimely. Although his "new evidence," including a report on coerced confessions and an eyewitness recantation, impeaches the state's evidence against him, it does not prove he is actually innocent of the murder for which he was convicted and cannot be used to circumvent the one-year statute of limitations. Although the evidence could be enough to make a member of a hypothetical jury find the inmate not guilty, that is not the standard that governs habeas petitions, and because the witness who recanted his statement has already changed his story at least three times, the most recent version is unreliable and insufficient to prove actual innocence. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Batchelder, Filed On: April 16, 2024, Case #: 21-2968, Categories: Criminal Procedure, habeas, Murder
J. Stewart finds the district court properly dismissed the Texas inmate's second-in-time petition for lack of jurisdiction. Convicted for continuous sexual abuse, indecency with a child and sexual contact, and possession of child porn, the inmate says that though his first-in-time petition was still pending on appeal when his second-in-time habeas petition was filed, the second filing should have been construed as a motion to amend. Consistent with statutory and Supreme Court guidance, the inmate's second-in-time petition was successive, and subject to the court’s transfer order for lack of jurisdiction absent authorization to file. Affirmed.
Court: 5th Circuit, Judge: Stewart , Filed On: April 15, 2024, Case #: 21-11031, Categories: habeas, Sex Offender, Child Victims