Abuse Of Discretion Standard For Continuance

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

• Peckham v. Fam. Loan Co.
  262 F.2d 422· 5th Cir.· 1959-01-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying continuances, refusing document production, disallowing a proposed experiment, or refusing oral argument.
• Cargile-Schrage v. Schrage
  908 So. 2d 528· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-07-20 ·cited 23×
  A wife appealed a final judgment dissolving her marriage, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion by denying her motion for a continuance to allow her third attorney to represent her, which forced her to proceed pro se at trial. The court affirmed, holding that the den
• United States v. 9.19 Acres OF Land
  416 F.2d 1244· 6th Cir.· 1969-10-22 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying a continuance to allow a corporation to retain counsel after it was improperly denied pro se representation.
• C.J. v. Dep't OF Child. & Families
  756 So. 2d 1108· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-05-10 ·cited 22×
  C.J. appeals the termination of his parental rights to his daughter T.I.J. following the death of his infant son from blunt head trauma. The court affirms the termination, rejecting C.J.'s claims that the trial court abused its discretion by denying a continuance pending his crim
• United States v. Dougherty
  895 F.2d 399· 7th Cir.· 1990-02-08 ·cited 22×
  A jury verdict of guilty constitutes a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1202(a)(1), and failure to renew an objection to conditionally admitted evidence waives appellate review.
• Fulton v. Coppco, Inc.
  407 F.2d 611· 10th Cir.· 1969-03-11 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance and correctly applied Colorado law regarding statutory bonds for municipal construction contracts.
• Morgan v. United States
  380 F.2d 686· 9th Cir.· 1967-06-19 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the appellant's numerous procedural and substantive claims of error were without merit, affirming his convictions.
• United States v. Lussier
  929 F.2d 25· 1st Cir.· 1991-03-29 ·cited 21×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant's various challenges to the proceedings, including claims regarding arrest jurisdiction, self-incrimination, nature of charges, counsel, continuance, jury information, witness sequestration, and exhibit exclusion, were
• United States v. Blandina
  895 F.2d 293· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motions related to the Speedy Trial Act, continuances, and evidentiary rulings, and that sufficient evidence supported the tax evasion conviction.
• Freeze v. Griffith
  849 F.2d 172· 5th Cir.· 1988-07-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that various officials were immune from liability under § 1983 and that the remaining claims were barred by prescription or lacked merit. The court also taxed costs against the appellant for frivolous appeals.
• United States v. King
  762 F.2d 232· 2d Cir.· 1985-05-20 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance or access to grand jury testimony, and that the evidence did not support a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1512.
• United States v. Yager
  220 F.2d 795· 7th Cir.· 1955-03-30 ·cited 20×
  The evidence was sufficient to support the guilty verdict, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motions for continuance and a new trial.
• United States v. Davila
  704 F.2d 749· 5th Cir.· 1983-04-25 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions and that the trial court did not err in its rulings regarding discovery, evidence exclusion, or post-verdict juror interviews.
• United States v. Allen
  522 F.2d 1229· 6th Cir.· 1975-09-02 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in denying a continuance, that Miranda warnings were not required for statements made during a civil audit, and that various evidentiary rulings were proper.
• Robinson v. State
  561 So. 2d 419· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-05-14 ·cited 18×
  The First District Court of Appeal reversed Robinson's cocaine sale conviction because the trial judge abused her discretion by denying his motion for continuance when a crucial defense witness failed to appear despite being properly subpoenaed. The court held that where a defend
• Reiss v. United States
  324 F.2d 680· 1st Cir.· 1963-11-01 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy to defraud the United States against some appellants but reversed the conviction of one appellant, finding insufficient evidence.
• Hamp Andrews v. State
  134 Fla. 450· Fla.· 1938-10-24 ·cited 18×
  Hamp Andrews was convicted of larceny of a cow and appealed, claiming the trial court erred in denying his motion for continuance and that the evidence was insufficient. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, finding the motion failed to meet established requirements and the evidenc
• Am. Lease Plans, Inc. v. Silver Sand Co. OF Leesburg, Inc.
  637 F.2d 311· 5th Cir.· 1981-02-17 ·cited 17×
  A principal is liable for an agent's fraudulent acts if the principal clothed the agent with apparent authority, and the third party reasonably relied on that authority. The principal cannot deny the agent's authority under such circumstances.
• Williams v. State
  209 So. 3d 543· Fla.· 2017-01-19 ·cited 16×
  Donald Otis Williams was convicted of the 2010 kidnapping, robbery, and first-degree murder of an 81-year-old victim and sentenced to death by a jury vote of 9-3. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but reversed the death sentence because the jury's non-unanimous r
• Riley v. Riley
  14 So. 3d 1284· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-07-10 ·cited 16×
  Michael Riley appeals a final judgment of dissolution of marriage in a 26-year marriage, challenging the magistrate's denial of his motion for continuance to retain counsel and other rulings. The court reversed and remanded, finding the magistrate abused its discretion in denying
• United States v. West
  828 F.2d 1468· 10th Cir.· 1987-09-09 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying a continuance to allow the defense to present a key witness, materially prejudicing the defendant.
• United States v. Ploeger
  428 F.2d 1204· 6th Cir.· 1970-07-21 ·cited 16×
  The court held that denying the defendant's request for a continuance constituted an abuse of discretion, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Smith
  548 F.2d 545· 5th Cir.· 1977-03-10 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motions for continuance, failing to instruct the jury on duress or intoxication, denying the motion for acquittal, or denying the motion for mistrial due to prosecutorial misconduct.
• Taylor v. Inst. FOR Med. Weight Loss & Gary W. Mallow, M.D.
  863 So. 2d 398· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-12-24 ·cited 14×
  The trial court abused its discretion by denying the plaintiff's motion for a continuance, which resulted in an injustice.
• Peiman v. Peiman
  829 So. 2d 307· Fla. 5th DCA· 2002-10-25 ·cited 14×
  A former husband appeals an amended final judgment of dissolution of marriage, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to continue the final hearing on child support and the court's deviation from child support guidelines without proper findings. The appellate court re
• Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc. v. Nunez
  646 So. 2d 831· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-12-14 ·cited 14×
  Carnival Cruise Lines appeals a jury verdict in a personal injury case, challenging the trial court's decision to allow the plaintiff to amend his complaint mid-trial to add a claim for aggravation of a preexisting varicose vein condition. The appellate court reversed and remande
• United States v. Robinson
  967 F.2d 287· 9th Cir.· 1992-06-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that federal prosecution did not violate due process, ineffective assistance of counsel claims are generally for collateral attack, the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion, there was sufficient evidence for the conviction, and the sentence was pr
• Jones v. State
  477 So. 2d 26· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-10-15 ·cited 14×
• Harrelson v. State
  259 So. 2d 526· Fla. 1st DCA· 1972-03-28 ·cited 14×
  Bobby Joe Harrelson was convicted of robbery and sentenced to twenty-five years. He appealed arguing that the trial court erred by denying a continuance due to prejudicial news coverage and that the prosecutor's closing argument was inflammatory. The appellate court affirmed, fin
• United States v. Blassick
  422 F.2d 652· 7th Cir.· 1970-02-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a prosecutor's comment on a defendant's silence, while improper, was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given defense counsel's prior remarks and the court's curative instructions. The court also held that a warrantless search of a locker was permissible under
• United States v. Tham
  960 F.2d 1391· 9th Cir.· 1991-11-05 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motions and issuing jury instructions, affirming his conviction and sentence.
• Jackson v. United States
  330 F.2d 445· 5th Cir.· 1964-04-08 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in denying the motions for continuance and that the jury instruction was proper.
• United States v. Heine
  920 F.2d 552· 8th Cir.· 1990-12-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant impliedly waived his right to self-representation by acquiescing to standby counsel's active participation, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying an additional continuance.
• United States v. Gambize Schardar
  850 F.2d 1457· 11th Cir.· 1988-08-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant's convictions for wire fraud, making and uttering false bills of lading, and interstate transportation of property taken by fraud were supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or in denying
• United States v. Whiteside
  810 F.2d 1306· 5th Cir.· 1987-01-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the admission of government exhibits and the denial of a continuance were not erroneous, and the jury instructions on willfulness were proper.
• Pittman v. State
  360 So. 2d 1138· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-07-21 ·cited 12×
  Charles Pittman appealed his conviction for unlawful entry into a cafe with intent to commit a crime. The Florida appellate court affirmed his conviction, rejecting both his challenge to the trial court's denial of a continuance and his sufficiency of evidence argument.
• Robinson v. State
  256 So. 2d 29· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-12-07 ·cited 12×
  Betty Robinson appealed her criminal convictions, challenging the trial court's denial of a continuance and exclusion of her husband's testimony. The appellate court affirmed the convictions, finding no abuse of discretion by the trial judge and holding that Robinson's own lack o
• United States v. Lorick
  753 F.2d 1295· 4th Cir.· 1985-02-08 ·cited 11×
  The court held that Dobson was denied his constitutional right to proceed pro se, requiring reversal of his conviction, while affirming the convictions of the other appellants.
• Kepner v. State
  911 So. 2d 1256· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-09-28 ·cited 10×
  Mark Kepner appealed his convictions for aggravated fleeing and eluding and grand theft, along with his habitual felony offender sentence, raising three issues. The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the first two issues but reversed and remanded on the third issue
• Lawson v. State
  884 So. 2d 540· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-11-03 ·cited 10×
  Ross Lawson appeals his conviction for burglary, robbery, carjacking, and felony battery, arguing the trial court abused its discretion in denying his attorney's motion for continuance due to inadequate trial preparation time. The Fourth District affirmed, holding that Lawson's o
• Carpenter v. Carpenter
  451 So. 2d 914· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-06-01 ·cited 10×
  Loretta Carpenter appealed a final judgment dissolving her marriage, challenging the trial court's denial of her motion for continuance on the eve of trial. The First District Court of Appeal reversed, finding that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to postpone tri
• United States v. Lethenia Alfonzia Williams
  435 F.2d 1001· 5th Cir.· 1970-12-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that bringing hashish into the United States after taking it out of the country, without declaration, constitutes illegal importation, and that the prosecutor's comments on appellant's prior admissions were permissible.
• SAM v. United States
  385 F.2d 213· 10th Cir.· 1967-11-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to grant a continuance for the defendant to secure new counsel, nor was the statute's sentencing provision an unconstitutional delegation of power. The sentence imposed was not cruel and unusual punishment.
• Kamhi v. Waterview Towers Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
  793 So. 2d 1033· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-07-18 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by imposing severe sanctions that prohibited the defendant from presenting evidence and by denying her request for a continuance to obtain legal representation.
• United States v. Marquardt
  695 F.2d 1300· 11th Cir.· 1983-01-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying a continuance, admitting other crimes evidence, or refusing a pretrial hearing for coconspirator statements, and affirmed the convictions.
• United States v. Sellers
  658 F.2d 230· 4th Cir.· 1981-09-01 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no abuse of discretion in the trial court's denial of the defendant's motions for continuance, severance, and restrictions on cross-examination.
• Levin v. Levin
  60 So. 3d 1116· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-05-11 ·cited 7×
  Gail Levin challenged her mother's 2008 will and trust, alleging undue influence and lack of testamentary capacity. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's findings on undue influence and testamentary capacity, but reversed and remanded regarding whether the mother suffere
• In re Narowetz Mech. Contractors, Inc.
  898 F.2d 1306· 7th Cir.· 1990-04-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in denying continuances and refusing to allow amendments to admissions, and that the denial of a hearing was not a denial of due process.
• United States v. Mitchell
  765 F.2d 130· 10th Cir.· 1985-06-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance and that the defendant received due process.
• United States v. Garman
  748 F.2d 218· 4th Cir.· 1984-11-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that venue was proper in the District of Maryland and that the denial of a continuance to present cumulative evidence was not an abuse of discretion or a violation of the defendant's rights. The jury instructions regarding willfulness were also deemed proper.