Habeas Corpus - Recent Cases - 2021

Below we have compiled a list of the case law decided in 2021 related to petitions for habeas corpus in Florida. These cases may be helpful if you are dealing with someone under arrest, or detained, and there is an issue as to whether the imprisonment is lawful under the Florida and U.S. Constitution.

Since there are 14 cases use Control + F to search for your issue in the list of cases below.

  1. Parks v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.   March 17, 2021 - 319 So.3d 102

Issue in the Case:  Absence of counsel during the defendant’s post-plea deposition did not violate his right to counsel. "Because the record is devoid of any showing of error “so patently unfair and tainted that [it] is manifestly clear to all who view it,” In re Marinari, 596 B.R. 809, 819 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 2019) (citation omitted), or Parks “is being illegally restrained of his liberty.” Anglin v. Mayo, 88 So. 2d 918, 919 (Fla. 1956). Thus, we deny the petition."

 

  1. Fernald v. Judd

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.   November 3, 2021 - 329 So.3d 219

Issue in the Case:  Pre-trial detainee’s entry of a plea agreement and release from custody rendered moot her petition for writ of habeas corpus. According to the court "we are compelled to dismiss the petition as moot because Ms. Fernald has since entered into a plea agreement with the State and is no longer in custody. See M.M. v. Wood, 152 So. 3d 1280, 1281 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (concluding that the petitioner's release from secure detention warranted dismissal based on mootness despite the possibility that the issue “may conceivably recur,” because “it will not necessarily evade review if it does so”). "

 

  1. Smith v. State

Supreme Court of Florida.   October 21, 2021 -  330 So.3d 867

Issue in the Case:  Counsel was not deficient in deciding not to hire forensic experts to challenge State’s theory on the murder weapon. "Defendants cannot relitigate the substance of postconviction claims in a habeas petition under the guise of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. Id.; see Knight v. State, 923 So. 2d 387, 395 (Fla. 2005) (“[C]laims [that] were raised in [a] postconviction motion ... cannot be relitigated in a habeas petition.”)."

 

  1. Hilton v. State

Supreme Court of Florida.   August 26, 2021 - 326 So.3d 640

Issue in the Case:  Counsel’s decision not to present mitigating evidence of petitioner’s life history during the penalty phase did not amount to ineffective assistance. "Hilton argues that his postconviction and habeas claims are different because one raises concerns over asserting the claim and the other raises concerns over preserving the claim. However, this distinction is meritless. For example, in Schwab v. State, this Court held that a habeas claim of judicial bias was procedurally barred because it was raised in the motion for postconviction relief even though the postconviction claim concerned the lack of the claim being asserted by counsel and the habeas claim concerned the failure to preserve the claim. 814 So. 2d at 409-14. Hilton is not entitled to relief."

 

  1. Anderson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.   March 31, 2021 - 313 So.3d 1196

Issue in the Case:  Appellate counsel’s failure to argue that issues under state law also violated federal law did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. "To exhaust state remedies and preserve a claim for federal review, a defendant need only present the substance of a federal constitutional claim to the state courts. See Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270, 278, 92 S.Ct. 509, 30 L.Ed.2d 438 (1971). Because his counsel's failure to raise the federal claims on direct appeal does not hamper his ability to seek relief in federal court, Anderson has not shown prejudice and cannot prevail on this claim. See Pardo v. State, 941 So. 2d 1057, 1072–73 (Fla. 2006) (explaining that if a defendant cannot establish one prong of ineffective assistance of counsel claim, the court need not address the other prong)."

 

  1. Hodges v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.   September 29, 2021 - 327 So.3d 923

Issue in the Case:  Defendant charged with driving under the influence with serious bodily injury and damage to property or person was not entitled to pretrial release. "A petition for writ of habeas corpus is the proper vehicle to challenge an order of pretrial detention. State v. Broom, 523 So. 2d 639, 641 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); see also Miller v. State, 980 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008); Holmes v. State, 933 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)."

 

  1. Orfelia v. Junior

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.   May 7, 2021 -  319 So.3d 764

Issue in the Case:  Petitioner was entitled to habeas relief for being held without bond for felonies which were all bondable as a matter of right. "petitioner's pretrial release to electronic monitoring was revoked for violating a condition of release, but not for an alleged commission of a new offense;1 and the State has not filed a motion for pretrial detention—render it indistinguishable from Ginsberg v. Ryan, 60 So. 3d 475 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011), in which we granted a similar petition for writ of habeas corpus. As we held in Ginsberg, and reaffirm here"

 

  1. Summers v. Williams

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.   April 8, 2021 - 321 So.3d 866

Issue in the Case:  Petitioner failed to present sufficient evidence to overcome the presumption of correctness of the court’s decision to deny his motion to reinstate the bond. "A petition for writ of habeas corpus is the proper method to seek review of an order regarding pretrial release. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.131(d)(3). Petitioners seeking to challenge a trial court's determination on bond must present evidence to overcome the presumption that the trial court's order was correct. Hernandez v. Roth, 890 So. 2d 1173, 1174 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (“Because trial judges are in a superior position to determine what conditions will be required to ensure that the defendant will appear in future proceedings and that the defendant is not a risk to the community, a defendant seeking a writ of habeas corpus ‘must adduce evidence sufficient to overcome the presumption of correctness of the trial court's order.’ ” (quoting State ex rel. Smith v. Untreiner, 246 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)))."

 

  1. Lacue v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.   December 15, 2021 - 330 So.3d 1038

Issue in the Case:  Counsel’s failure to file a motion to preserve trial court’s error in appeal of resentencing proceeding was not ineffective assistance. "The standard of review for claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel raised in habeas petitions “mirrors the Strickland standard for trial counsel ineffectiveness.” Jones v. Moore, 794 So. 2d 579, 583 (Fla. 2001). To prove a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel through a habeas petition, a petitioner must prove first, that appellate counsel's performance was deficient because “the alleged omissions are of such magnitude as to constitute a serious error or substantial deficiency falling measurably outside the range of professionally acceptable performance” and second, that the petitioner was prejudiced because appellate counsel's deficiency “compromised the appellate process to such a degree as to undermine confidence in the correctness of the result.”

 

  1. Earven v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.   June 4, 2021  - 324 So.3d 22

Issue in the Case:  Appellate counsel was not ineffective for failing to argue fundamental error related to a jury instruction to which the parties agreed at trial. "Because Earven asserted ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, not habeas corpus, such revamping of the petition is not appropriate here. See Rosier v. State, 276 So. 3d 403, 406 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (en banc) (recognizing the court's responsibility to exercise restraint by confining its decisions to the issues raised by the parties). It isn't the Court's place to improve upon party arguments."

 

  1. Frederick v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.   May 21, 2021  - 318 So.3d 651

Issue in the Case: The trial court's denial of a motion to modify conditions of pretrial release was warranted. The court converted "the certiorari petition to a petition for writ of habeas corpus....... to justify our testing its validity in habeas corpus."

 

  1. Daniel v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.   May 19, 2021  - 317 So.3d 1278

Issue in the Case:  Law enforcement officers did not qualify as judicial officers under a statute permitting pretrial detention if the defendant threatened the judicial officer. "Under the principle previously explained by this Court in Dollar v. State, 909 So. 2d 399, 401 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005), the trial court's order here denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus is arguably a nullity because that petition should have been filed in this Court. Alternatively, the trial court should have transferred the petition to this Court instead of undertaking a review of its own orders. Id. Accordingly, we deem it best to treat this *1280 appeal as a petition for writ of habeas corpus filed in this Court. Id."

 

  1. Hayes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.   December 29, 2021 - 331 So.3d 302

Issue in the Case:  Failure to allege an exception to the two-year limit for filing a post-conviction motion, rendered a post-conviction challenge untimely, successive, and without merit. Hayes' postconviction challenge was successive. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(h)(2) (“[A] court may dismiss a second or successive motion if the court finds that it fails to allege new or different grounds for relief and the prior determination was on the merits ....”). Hayes filed a postconviction motion in 2018, raising a nearly identical argument to the one raised in her habeas petition—that the trial court fundamentally erred when it instructed the jury on manslaughter. The trial court denied her motion, and when Hayes appealed, this Court affirmed.

 

Related Content:

Need Help?  Can't find what you are looking for or you would like to report a problem?  Please contact us and we will be happy to assist you. Your feedback is appreciated. 

These cases should not be relied upon as case law is always evolving. Before relying on any content on this website, it should be independently verified by a licensed legal professional. THIS CONTENT IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON AS LEGAL ADVICE. YOU SHOULD CONSULT WITH A LICENSED FLORIDA ATTORNEY FOR ANY LEGAL MATTER.

 

Finding Legal Information Made Easy. BrowardLegalDirectory.com.