Admissibility Of Evidence Of Other Offenses

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

• Finnegan v. United States
  204 F.2d 105· 8th Cir.· 1953-04-30 ·cited 118×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's preliminary motions, admitting evidence, or in its jury instructions, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.
• United States v. Burkhart
  458 F.2d 201· 10th Cir.· 1972-02-14 ·cited 94×
  Evidence of prior Dyer Act convictions is admissible to prove intent and negate accident or mistake in a current Dyer Act charge.
• United States v. Iacullo
  226 F.2d 788· 7th Cir.· 1955-11-04 ·cited 84×
  The court held that the defendant's constitutional rights were not violated by the taking of his fingerprints, and evidence of other offenses was admissible to show common scheme and identity. The court affirmed the conviction.
• United States v. Accardo
  298 F.2d 133· 7th Cir.· 1962-01-05 ·cited 82×
  The court held that prejudicial errors occurred during the trial, necessitating a new trial.
• Gregory v. United States
  365 F.2d 203· 8th Cir.· 1966-08-11 ·cited 76×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of other offenses or in reading reporter's notes to the jury.
• Jones v. United States
  251 F.2d 288· 10th Cir.· 1958-01-06 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish a conspiracy to import intoxicating liquor into Oklahoma, but not a conspiracy to carry on business without paying the required tax. The court reversed the conviction of one defendant for lack of evidence of his knowled
• Hall v. United States
  168 F.2d 161· D.C. Cir.· 1948-04-05 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the systematic exclusion of Negroes from the jury that tried Negro appellants violated the Fifth Amendment's due process clause, congressional policy, and Supreme Court precedent.
• Fernandez v. United States
  329 F.2d 899· 9th Cir.· 1964-03-26 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions for mistrial, severance, or in admitting certain evidence, but reversed convictions on the conspiracy count due to insufficient evidence.
• Montgomery v. United States
  203 F.2d 887· 5th Cir.· 1953-04-17 ·cited 62×
  The court held that denying defense counsel the right to examine notes used by a witness to refresh his memory constituted reversible error.
• Green v. State
  190 So. 2d 42· Fla. 2d DCA· 1966-09-07 ·cited 60×
  Henry Green, Jr., was convicted of robbery at gunpoint based primarily on eyewitness testimony. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed the conviction because the trial court improperly admitted hearsay testimony from a jail visitor about statements Green allegedly made reg
• Tucker v. United States
  375 F.2d 363· 8th Cir.· 1967-03-23 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the defendant's incriminating statements were admissible because he was properly informed of his Miranda rights, voluntarily waived them, and the trial court's procedures, though unusual, were invited by the defense and did not prejudice the defendant.
• United States v. Wall
  225 F.2d 905· 7th Cir.· 1955-09-28 ·cited 56×
  The court held that evidence of other offenses was admissible to show a common scheme or purpose, and that the statute prohibiting the solicitation of money for influence in obtaining government appointments applied to promotions as well as original appointments.
• United States v. Spatuzza
  331 F.2d 214· 7th Cir.· 1964-04-24 ·cited 54×
  The court held that there was no fatal variance between the indictment and proof, that identification and possession evidence was sufficient, and that the trial court did not err in denying motions for mistrial or in its jury instructions and rulings regarding the Jencks Act.
• United States v. Cartek
  401 F.2d 748· 3d Cir.· 1968-10-09 ·cited 50×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the admission of evidence of prior offenses was proper and that the failure to give a limiting instruction did not constitute plain error.
• Gluck v. State
  62 So. 2d 71· Fla.· 1952-12-22 ·cited 46×
  The appellant was convicted of assault with intent to commit rape after being charged with rape. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction, finding that the trial was fundamentally unfair due to prosecutorial misconduct, including introduction of evidence of prior similar
• Owens v. State
  289 So. 2d 472· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-02-08 ·cited 43×
  William Owens appeals his conviction for aggravated battery, challenging the sufficiency of evidence, admissibility of threats evidence, and whether the victim's injuries met statutory requirements for great bodily harm. The court affirmed the conviction, holding that evidence su
• Alva B. Harper v. United States
  239 F.2d 945· D.C. Cir.· 1956-11-21 ·cited 40×
• Shelton v. United States
  169 F.2d 665· D.C. Cir.· 1948-05-24 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the appellant's numerous asserted errors, when considered individually or in aggregate, did not constitute prejudicial error denying him a fair trial.
• Grant v. United States
  255 F.2d 341· 6th Cir.· 1958-05-29 ·cited 28×
  Evidence of other offenses is admissible if it falls within recognized exceptions, and inconsistent jury verdicts do not invalidate a conviction.
• Burcham v. United States
  163 F.2d 761· D.C. Cir.· 1947-08-04 ·cited 28×
  The court held that admitting evidence of a prior offense during a continuous affray was not error, and that a judge's statement to the jury that recommendations of mercy are not binding is proper.
• Berthold Goodman v. United States
  273 F.2d 853· 8th Cir.· 1960-01-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on the elements of a 'scheme to defraud' without a specific request, nor in admitting evidence of other similar offenses to show intent, nor in allowing testimony from a co-defendant who pleaded guil
• Woodland v. United States
  347 F.2d 956· 10th Cir.· 1965-06-25 ·cited 18×
  The court held that evidence of a subsequent incident was admissible to show a course of conduct and that the trial court did not err in denying a mistrial or motion for acquittal.
• Williams v. United States
  199 F.2d 921· 5th Cir.· 1952-11-07 ·cited 17×
  The court held that evidence of prior offenses is admissible in civil suits to prove intent and that the evidence presented was sufficient to support the jury's verdict.
• United States v. Ahern
  612 F.2d 507· 10th Cir.· 1980-01-03 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the admission of wives' testimony, denial of a new trial based on recantation, admission of evidence of other offenses, and sufficiency of evidence were not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. Carney
  461 F.2d 465· 3d Cir.· 1972-05-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding unrelated violent acts, even with a curative instruction, constituted reversible error because it was highly prejudicial and could not be considered harmless.
• United States v. Bland
  432 F.2d 96· 5th Cir.· 1970-09-25 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the introduction of evidence concerning other vehicles, the admission of testimony regarding insurance compensation for a stolen vehicle, the jury instruction on the inference of knowledge from possession of recently stolen property, and the denial of access t
• Hamman v. United States
  340 F.2d 145· 9th Cir.· 1965-01-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that evidence of prior tax understatements was admissible to prove intent and willfulness, and that the net worth method was sufficiently established to support the conviction.
• United States v. Rispo
  470 F.2d 1099· 3d Cir.· 1973-01-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury charge regarding possession of recently stolen property was proper, and that joint representation did not deny effective assistance of counsel.
• Lawrence v. United States
  162 F.2d 156· 9th Cir.· 1947-05-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of similar conduct is admissible to prove intent and that prosecutorial cross-examination aimed at impeaching an impeachment witness is not prejudicial misconduct if objections are sustained.
• Hess v. United States
  254 F.2d 585· 8th Cir.· 1958-04-11 ·cited 9×
  The court held that evidence of another offense is admissible if relevant to proving a material aspect of the charged crime, even if it incidentally proves commission of independent offenses.
• United States v. Wolff
  409 F.2d 413· 7th Cir.· 1969-04-08 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of other offenses, the opinion of a non-expert witness, or admissions made by the defendant, and that the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights were not violated.
• William v. Massei
  241 F.2d 895· 1st Cir.· 1957-02-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that evidence of prior graft-taking by a police officer is admissible to prove a continuing source of unreported income, even if it suggests commission of another crime.
• United States v. Hager
  461 F.2d 321· 7th Cir.· 1972-05-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the admission of certain testimony and arguments, while potentially improper, did not constitute reversible error given the strength of the evidence and the lack of substantial prejudice to the defendant.
• United States v. Hamilton
  455 F.2d 1268· 3d Cir.· 1972-02-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appellant's claims of prosecutorial misconduct and improper admission of evidence did not constitute reversible error, and the judgment of the lower court was affirmed.
• Lypp v. United States
  159 F.2d 353· 6th Cir.· 1947-02-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that there was substantial evidence to support the conviction for violating Ration Order 2-B, and the trial court properly denied the motion for a directed verdict.
• Knott v. State
  198 So. 3d 768· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-03-02 ·cited 1×
  Derrick Knott appeals his convictions for kidnapping with intent to interfere with a governmental function and burglary of a conveyance with assault. The court affirms, holding that when a suspect commandeers a vehicle and driver to flee from a lawfully attempting law enforcement
• United States v. Thornley
  460 F.2d 1188· 9th Cir.· 1972-05-15
  The court held that evidence of using a revoked credit card was admissible to show intent and that the sufficiency of evidence claim was waived.
• United States v. Cordell Cassell
  440 F.2d 569· 7th Cir.· 1971-04-09
  The court held that a post-indictment confession made in the absence of counsel is admissible if the defendant was properly informed of his rights and voluntarily waived them. The court also held that the trial judge's questioning and admission of evidence regarding other offense