Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Continuance

174 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• MacKENNA v. Ellis
  280 F.2d 592· 5th Cir.· 1960-06-22 ·cited 341×
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority's decision to set aside a state court conviction is not justified by the facts or cited authority and sets a dangerous precedent.
• United States v. Darby
  744 F.2d 1508· 11th Cir.· 1984-10-29 ·cited 96×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding no violations of speedy trial rights, abuse of discretion in denying continuances, or denial of a fair trial. It also rejected claims regarding jurisdiction, sentencing, and sufficiency of evidence.
• Branch v. State
  685 So. 2d 1250· Fla.· 1996-11-21 ·cited 92×
  Eric Scott Branch appeals his death sentence for the brutal murder, sexual assault, and robbery of Susan Morris, a college student. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the conviction and death penalty, finding the trial court did not abuse its discretion on procedural matters and t
• Matera v. State
  218 So. 2d 180· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-01-21 ·cited 89×
  John Matera and Gennero Galtieri were convicted by jury of robbery at Harbor Island Spa and appealed on six grounds, including denial of continuances, jury qualifications, witness impeachment, and sufficiency of evidence on ownership and asportation. The appellate court affirmed
• United States v. Studley
  783 F.2d 934· 9th Cir.· 1986-02-26 ·cited 85×
  An illegal arrest or detention does not void a subsequent conviction, and a district court's denial of a continuance or jury lists, or a judge's recusal, will be affirmed if not an abuse of discretion or legally insufficient.
• United States v. Eagleston
  417 F.2d 11· 10th Cir.· 1969-10-17 ·cited 82×
  The court held that Faubian was misjoined as a defendant under Fed.R.Crim.P. 8(b) and his conviction must be reversed, while Eagleston's convictions were affirmed.
• Randolph v. State
  853 So. 2d 1051· Fla.· 2003-04-24 ·cited 80×
  Richard Barry Randolph, a death-sentenced inmate, appealed the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion and petitioned for habeas corpus relief, raising claims of judicial bias from ex parte communications, ineffective assistance of counsel, and other constitutional violati
• United States v. Ellenbogen
  365 F.2d 982· 2d Cir.· 1966-09-15 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying continuances, admitting business records and a chart, refusing to allow the defendant to discharge counsel, or excusing an ill juror.
• United States v. Harris
  441 F.2d 1333· 10th Cir.· 1971-05-13 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in overruling motions for mistrial, continuance, severance, or acquittal, and that the defendants received a fair trial.
• McKAY v. State
  504 So. 2d 1280· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-12-03 ·cited 67×
  McKay appeals his conviction and sentence for robbery with a firearm and aggravated assault. The Florida appellate court affirms the conviction and sentence, rejecting McKay's challenges regarding the denial of a continuance for private counsel preparation, the admission of testi
• United States v. Nolan
  700 F.2d 479· 9th Cir.· 1983-01-20 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying continuances or severance, properly admitted evidence regarding a co-defendant's knowledge of the defendant's prior incarceration, and correctly excluded self-defense evidence for firearms offenses.
• Brown v. State
  426 So. 2d 76· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-02-08 ·cited 62×
  Linda Brown was convicted of forgery, uttering a forged instrument, and grand theft in connection with cashing a stolen company check. The court affirmed the forgery conviction but reversed the other two convictions because they relied primarily on hypnotically-induced testimony
• Leino v. United States
  338 F.2d 154· 10th Cir.· 1964-11-12 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the defendant waived his right to counsel and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying continuances.
• United States v. Henderson
  588 F.2d 157· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-18 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in denying a continuance, fingerprint evidence was properly admitted, a lesser-included offense instruction was not warranted, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Alf Hill, Jr.
  526 F.2d 1019· 10th Cir.· 1975-12-15 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motions for continuance and independent psychiatric examination, nor did it err in denying the request for hybrid representation or in its handling of the voir dire and impeachment evidence.
• United States v. Jimenez-Diaz
  659 F.2d 562· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-19 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in questioning a co-defendant about his guilty plea, denying a continuance, or admitting a post-arrest statement, and that the cumulative effect of alleged errors did not deny a fair trial.
• United States v. Sahley
  526 F.2d 913· 5th Cir.· 1976-02-06 ·cited 50×
  The court affirmed the conviction for making a false financial statement but vacated the sentence, remanding for resentencing as a single offense.
• United States v. Abshire
  471 F.2d 116· 5th Cir.· 1972-12-26 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motions for a continuance, severance, and to compel witnesses, nor in admitting certain testimony or eyewitness identification evidence, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• Woods v. State
  490 So. 2d 24· Fla.· 1986-04-24 ·cited 47×
  Ronald Woods was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for stabbing a corrections officer to death while imprisoned. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and sentence after reviewing claims regarding jury selection, trial continuance denial, courtro
• Manfred Daut v. United States
  405 F.2d 312· 9th Cir.· 1968-12-16 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for a separate trial, the motion for a continuance, or in its rulings regarding the jury and the constitutionality of the statute.
• Jackson v. State
  464 So. 2d 1181· Fla.· 1985-01-31 ·cited 44×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a death penalty conviction for Douglas Marshall Jackson because the trial court abused its discretion by denying a continuance motion when defense counsel was suffering from a medically-documented head injury and medication side effects that imp
• Israel v. State
  837 So. 2d 381· Fla.· 2002-12-19 ·cited 43×
  Connie Ray Israel was convicted of first-degree murder in the December 1991 death of Esther Hagans and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and death sentence, rejecting claims of trial error related to his courtroom presence, restraints, jury com
• United States v. Santano Coronel-Quintana
  752 F.2d 1284· 8th Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for continuance, severance, and suppression, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Gower
  447 F.2d 187· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-01 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the defendant's various contentions regarding the grand jury process, continuance denial, pre-trial motions, juror qualification, judicial conduct, sufficiency of evidence, and variance between indictment and proof were without merit.
• United States v. Garmany
  762 F.2d 929· 11th Cir.· 1985-06-11 ·cited 41×
  The court held that requiring a defendant to pay travel fees for inmate witnesses did not violate the Sixth Amendment's compulsory process clause, absent a showing of indigency and prejudice. The court also held that the denial of a continuance and other evidentiary rulings did n
• United States v. Barrentine
  591 F.2d 1069· 5th Cir.· 1979-03-22 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance for retained counsel and that the admission of certain evidence was proper.
• United States v. Poulack
  556 F.2d 83· 1st Cir.· 1977-05-26 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance to allow the defendant to be represented by his preferred counsel, balancing the defendant's right to counsel against the need for an orderly and speedy trial. The court also held that the s
• Strand v. Escambia Cnty.
  992 So. 2d 150· Fla.· 2008-09-18 ·cited 36×
  Dr. Strand challenged Escambia County's validation of $135 million in revenue bonds for a road-widening project in the Southwest Escambia Improvement District, arguing the bonds required voter approval under Florida's constitutional referendum requirement. The Florida Supreme Cou
• Edwrick Fowler v. Jones
  899 F.2d 1088· 11th Cir.· 1990-04-30 ·cited 36×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's judgment, disagreeing with the majority's conclusions on two points.
• Nestor Rodrigo Rios-Berrios v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  776 F.2d 859· 9th Cir.· 1985-11-15 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the immigration judge abused discretion by granting insufficient continuances, effectively denying the petitioner his statutory right to counsel of choice, and that this denial was prejudicial.
• Galbraith v. United States
  387 F.2d 617· 10th Cir.· 1968-01-11 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the admission of bank records obtained via subpoena was lawful and that the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Smith
  757 F.2d 1161· 11th Cir.· 1985-04-15 ·cited 34×
  The government's manipulation of evidence to create two separate crimes from a single transaction violates the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• Liberty Leasing Co., Inc. v. Hillsum Sales Corp.
  380 F.2d 1013· 5th Cir.· 1967-07-21 ·cited 34×
  The court held that it was not error to grant summary judgment despite the Grossman deposition and not an abuse of discretion to deny the continuance.
• Snelgrove v. State
  107 So. 3d 242· Fla.· 2012-04-19 ·cited 33×
  David Snelgrove was convicted of murdering an elderly couple in 2000 and sentenced to death. On appeal after remand for a new penalty phase, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the death sentences, rejecting challenges to the trial court's denial of a continuance for mental retard
• United States v. Mitchell
  744 F.2d 701· 9th Cir.· 1984-10-04 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently alleged mail fraud and that the denial of a continuance and a bill of particulars did not constitute an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Keegan
  331 F.2d 257· 7th Cir.· 1964-04-02 ·cited 32×
  Each payment by an employer to a union representative constitutes a separate violation of 29 U.S.C.A. § 186(b), and the jury was properly instructed on the definition of 'willfully violates'.
• United States v. Olivas
  558 F.2d 1366· 10th Cir.· 1977-06-22 ·cited 30×
  The court held that separate sentences may not be imposed for offenses arising from the same transaction, even if convictions are affirmed.
• United States v. Long
  419 F.2d 91· 5th Cir.· 1969-12-03 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice is sufficient to sustain a conviction, and the denial of a continuance and failure to record certain proceedings do not constitute reversible error without a showing of specific prejudice.
• Dempsey v. MAC Towing, Inc.
  876 F.2d 1538· 11th Cir.· 1989-07-12 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the jury's verdict finding the employer negligent under the Jones Act was supported by substantial evidence, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its rulings on continuances, mistrials, or jury instructions.
• United States v. Albert
  595 F.2d 283· 5th Cir.· 1979-05-21 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance, dismissing the indictment for speedy trial violations, admitting evidence of prior criminal activity, admitting a tape recording as a prior consistent statement, or denying a new trial base
• United States v. Miller
  573 F.2d 388· 7th Cir.· 1978-01-20 ·cited 28×
• Taylor v. United States
  279 F.2d 10· 5th Cir.· 1960-05-13 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for continuance, nor did it err in permitting questioning about a prior conviction or in allowing the prosecutor's argument.
• United States v. Sawyers
  902 F.2d 1217· 6th Cir.· 1990-05-14 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for manufacturing marijuana was proper, and none of the alleged errors warranted reversal.
• United States v. Turk
  870 F.2d 1304· 7th Cir.· 1989-03-22 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for severance and continuance, and that prosecutorial comments and a witness's statement did not prejudice the defendants or deny them a fair trial.
• United States v. Swarek
  656 F.2d 331· 8th Cir.· 1981-08-12 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of conspiracy to defraud the SBA, that the admitted evidence was relevant and not unduly prejudicial, and that the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Taylor
  542 F.2d 1023· 8th Cir.· 1976-10-20 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance for late disclosure of informant information, nor in refusing to order production of government witnesses' criminal records.
• Hollis Mills v. State
  280 So. 2d 35· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-07-10 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying continuances and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.
• United States v. Rosenthal
  470 F.2d 837· 2d Cir.· 1972-12-11 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of tax evasion, and that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motions for a continuance or in allowing him to proceed pro se.
• Richardson v. Richardson
  900 So. 2d 656· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-04-01 ·cited 25×
  Edward Richardson appeals a divorce judgment awarding his ex-wife a portion of his FBI pension and requiring him to maintain life insurance to secure alimony. The court reverses and remands for a new trial because the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion for a
• Spolski Gen. Contractor, Inc. v. Jett-Aire Corp. Aviation Mgmt. OF Cent. Fla., Inc.
  637 So. 2d 968· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-06-03 ·cited 25×
  Spolski General Contractor appeals summary judgment and judgment on the pleadings dismissing its breach of warranty claims against paint manufacturer Benjamin Moore & Co. and paint supplier Senkarik Glass & Paint Co. after defective paint caused damage to an airport hangar. The c