Admissibility Of Prior Convictions

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

• United States v. Spero
  625 F.2d 779· 8th Cir.· 1980-06-19 ·cited 24×
  The court held that admitting a defendant's prior conviction, even if over ten years old, was not an abuse of discretion and any error was harmless.
• United States v. DeVINCENT
  546 F.2d 452· 1st Cir.· 1976-12-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the jury instructions, when read as a whole, adequately conveyed the statutory requirements for proving an extortionate extension of credit, and that the admission of certain evidence was not reversible error.
• United States v. Ledford Gene Harding
  525 F.2d 84· 7th Cir.· 1975-11-17 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the prosecutor's extensive cross-examination regarding the appellant's prior marijuana possession conviction, including details not admissible for impeachment and implying guilt rather than dishonesty, created undue prejudice requiring a new trial.
• Tapia v. Rodriguez
  446 F.2d 410· 10th Cir.· 1971-08-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that improper references to a "mug book" containing photographs of suspects, while not ideal, did not constitute plain error and did not deny the defendant due process, nor was his trial counsel ineffective.
• United States v. Graham
  325 F.2d 922· 6th Cir.· 1963-12-30 ·cited 24×
  A prosecutor's improper remarks and arguments, equating a nolo contendere plea to a guilty plea and making inflammatory statements about a defendant's prior conviction, can constitute prejudicial error requiring a new trial, even without timely objection.
• Fenwick v. United States
  252 F.2d 124· D.C. Cir.· 1958-01-16 ·cited 24×
• Carlton v. United States
  198 F.2d 795· 9th Cir.· 1952-08-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that evidence of a prior misdemeanor narcotics conviction is admissible to rebut a defense of entrapment, and that the prosecution had a reasonable basis to inquire about a prior conviction even if the defendant denied it.
• Madison v. State
  138 Fla. 467· Fla.· 1939-06-06 ·cited 23×
  Willie Madison was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. On appeal, he challenged the sufficiency of evidence for premeditation, the court's rulings on witness credibility, cross-examination regarding prior convictions, prosecutorial comment on his criminal his
• State v. Emmund
  698 So. 2d 1318· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-09-10 ·cited 22×
  The State petitioned for certiorari to challenge a trial court's order in limine prohibiting use of the statutory term "violent career criminal" in prosecuting Samuel Emmund for possession of a firearm by a violent career criminal. The court upheld the order, finding that the sta
• United States v. Terry
  729 F.2d 1063· 6th Cir.· 1984-03-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting tape-recorded conversations and evidence of prior misconduct, and that the defendants' other alleged trial errors did not warrant reversal.
• United States v. Olsen
  487 F.2d 77· 8th Cir.· 1973-11-06 ·cited 22×
  The admission of a prior conviction for a similar offense to show knowledge, and the admission of testimony about a pistol unrelated to the crime charged, were not reversible error.
• Edwards v. United States
  333 F.2d 588· 8th Cir.· 1964-06-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant waived his right to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence by failing to renew his motion for acquittal at the close of all evidence, and that the admission of a prior conviction pending appeal for impeachment purposes was not prejudicial.
• Goode v. United States
  149 F.2d 377· D.C. Cir.· 1945-03-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that possession of unstamped drugs creates a prima facie case of violation and that prior convictions are admissible to impeach a defendant's credibility when they testify.
• Lilton B. Harris v. State
  449 So. 2d 892· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-04-11 ·cited 20×
  Harris appeals his conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to dismiss based on collateral estoppel and double jeopardy, the admission of evidence of his four prior felony convictions, and the denial of his mo
• United States v. Holley
  493 F.2d 581· 9th Cir.· 1974-03-11 ·cited 20×
  The admission of evidence of a prior arrest for transporting illegal aliens and a 30-year-old conviction for forgery constituted reversible error.
• Eley v. United States
  117 F.2d 526· 6th Cir.· 1941-02-04 ·cited 20×
  The court held that admitting evidence of unrelated prior convictions and specific unlawful acts, even for the limited purpose of showing general reputation, was an error that prejudiced the defendant.
• Herndon v. State
  72 Fla. 108· Fla.· 1916-07-25 ·cited 20×
  J. A. Herndon was convicted of perjury for falsely testifying during a larceny trial that he had never been convicted of larceny or lived in South Carolina, when he had in fact been convicted of stealing a mule in South Carolina in 1901. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the con
• McGEE v. State
  435 So. 2d 854· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-06-07 ·cited 19×
  McGee was convicted of escape after he fled from a courtroom while in custody on multiple capiases issued for bond estreature. McGee appealed on double jeopardy grounds (claiming his prior contempt conviction barred escape prosecution), arguing the capiases were invalid, and rais
• Vazquez v. State
  405 So. 2d 177· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-08-04 ·cited 19×
  The Florida Third District Court of Appeal held that a trial court abuses its discretion by denying a motion to sever a count charging unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon from other counts when proof of the defendant's prior felony conviction would be inadmissib
• Blackburn v. Foltz
  828 F.2d 1177· 6th Cir.· 1987-09-17 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the petitioner was denied effective assistance of counsel due to counsel's failures to suppress prior convictions, investigate alibi, and obtain a trial transcript for impeachment.
• United States v. Vandetti
  623 F.2d 1144· 6th Cir.· 1980-06-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that admitting evidence of codefendants' prior convictions was prejudicial error, requiring reversal and remand for a new trial.
• United States v. Sims
  588 F.2d 1145· 6th Cir.· 1978-12-12 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the trial court properly admitted evidence of the defendant's prior convictions under Rule 609(b).
• Miller v. United States
  397 F.2d 272· 5th Cir.· 1968-07-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a prior forgery conviction, though five years old and similar to the current offense, was admissible to show criminal intent, and that the jury instructions, when read as a whole, properly limited its use to that purpose.
• Burt v. United States
  139 F.2d 73· 5th Cir.· 1943-11-30 ·cited 18×
  The court held that no reversible error appeared in either trial, affirming the judgments.
• Doyall Tompkins v. State
  386 So. 2d 597· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-08-06 ·cited 17×
  Doyall Tompkins was convicted of sexual battery committed while an inmate at a correctional facility and sentenced to thirty years. On appeal, he challenged various trial procedures including the appearance of state witnesses in prison clothing, voir dire questions about his inma
• United States v. Levine
  700 F.2d 1176· 8th Cir.· 1983-02-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to dismiss the indictment, the motion to exclude statements, or the motion to prevent the use of prior convictions for impeachment.
• United States v. Parten
  462 F.2d 430· 5th Cir.· 1972-06-09 ·cited 16×
• Mottram v. Murch
  458 F.2d 626· 1st Cir.· 1972-04-12 ·cited 16×
  The court held that allowing jurors who sat on the first trial to sit on the second trial, after the defendant had testified and invoked the Fifth Amendment, created a likelihood of prejudice that denied the petitioner due process.
• United States v. O'Connor
  433 F.2d 752· 1st Cir.· 1970-10-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the admission of the defendant's statements, copies of documents, a political flier, his attorney's statements, and evidence of his father's tax conviction were proper, and that the jury instructions were adequate.
• Ciravolo v. United States
  384 F.2d 54· 1st Cir.· 1967-10-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the jury instruction regarding a prior felony conviction was prejudicial error because the conviction was a misdemeanor and not admissible to impeach credibility.
• United States v. Ugo Rossi
  219 F.2d 612· 2d Cir.· 1955-02-18 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's conviction and that the cross-examination regarding prior convictions and false statements on applications was proper.
• United States v. Daniel
  957 F.2d 162· 5th Cir.· 1992-03-19 ·cited 15×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence for possession of stolen goods and structuring, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• Jones v. State
  305 So. 2d 827· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-01-10 ·cited 15×
  James Daniel Jones was convicted of robbery by jury and sentenced to 25 years. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the prosecutor improperly cross-examined the defendant about specific prior crimes (escape and armed robbery), wh
• United States v. King
  897 F.2d 911· 7th Cir.· 1990-03-21 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while the district court erred in admitting evidence of the defendant's three prior felony convictions and in refusing a limiting instruction, these errors were harmless because the evidence of the defendant's guilt was overwhelming and uncontroverted.
• United States v. Smith
  605 F.2d 839· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's late request for a free transcript of a prior mistrial, nor was the introduction of the defendant's guilty plea and references to his criminal record improper or prejudicial.
• Houston v. State
  337 So. 2d 852· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-10-06 ·cited 14×
  Paul Houston appeals his robbery conviction and 40-year sentence, arguing the trial court erred by allowing cross-examination about his prior convictions without the State introducing records to support questions about more than seven convictions. The appellate court affirmed the
• United States v. Godkins
  527 F.2d 1321· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-03 ·cited 14×
  The court should have ordered an in camera hearing to determine the necessity of witness Doe's information, balancing the defendant's right to prepare a defense against the government's interest in informant secrecy.
• United States v. Alejandro
  527 F.2d 423· 5th Cir.· 1976-02-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that probable cause existed for the arrests, that severance was not required, and that evidence of a prior conviction was admissible for limited purposes.
• United States v. Sanchez
  482 F.2d 5· 5th Cir.· 1973-07-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the prosecutor's cross-examination regarding a prior assault charge and the prosecutor's argument to the jury were prejudicial and constituted reversible error.
• Newman v. United States
  220 F.2d 289· 5th Cir.· 1955-03-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that evidence of prior convictions was admissible for impeachment, the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, and the jury charge was not erroneous enough to require reversal.
• United States v. Miller
  895 F.2d 1431· D.C. Cir.· 1990-02-06 ·cited 13×
  The court held that evidence of a defendant's prior conviction can be admissible to show a witness's state of mind (e.g., fear) and that the erroneous admission of such evidence was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• Pryor v. State
  855 So. 2d 134· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-08-12 ·cited 12×
  John Pryor was convicted of first-degree murder after a jury trial where the key State witness, Robert Lee Gilbert, falsely testified about his prior criminal convictions. The appellate court reversed the conviction because the trial judge improperly excluded certified copies of
• Brown v. State
  700 So. 2d 447· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-10-22 ·cited 12×
  Terry Kenneth Brown appeals his conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, challenging the trial court's admission of certified copies of his prior convictions despite his offer to stipulate to his felon status. The court declines to apply the recent federal dec
• United States v. Isadore Shadletsky
  491 F.2d 677· 5th Cir.· 1974-03-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a prior conviction for selling liquor without a license was admissible to prove intent for a charge of failing to pay the special tax, as the offenses shared similar physical elements and the prior conviction was sufficiently proven.
• Morrison v. United States
  491 F.2d 344· 8th Cir.· 1974-02-12 ·cited 12×
• United States v. Martell
  906 F.2d 555· 11th Cir.· 1990-07-19 ·cited 11×
  The court affirmed the conviction but vacated the sentence, remanding for resentencing because the trial court failed to provide an explanation for departing from sentencing guidelines when imposing an enhanced sentence for an offense committed while on release.
• Comer v. State
  318 So. 2d 419· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-07-29 ·cited 11×
  James Comer appeals his conviction for robbery and 8-year sentence, challenging the trial court's denial of discovery motions regarding the victim's criminal record and alleging improper cross-examination. The Florida appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding no prejudicia
• Rolle v. State
  386 So. 2d 3· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-07-22 ·cited 10×
  Ronald Rolle appeals his grand larceny conviction, challenging the trial judge's refusal to allow cross-examination of a prosecution witness about an ongoing perjury investigation. The court affirms, holding that while defendants may generally cross-examine prosecution witnesses
• United States v. Eliano
  522 F.2d 201· 2d Cir.· 1975-07-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of a prior state court conviction was proper and did not prejudice the defendant, and that the submission of an indictment to the jury was harmless error.
• United States v. Sherman
  240 F.2d 949· 2d Cir.· 1957-02-04 ·cited 10×
  Evidence of prior convictions is admissible as part of the prosecution's case in chief when it is clear that the defense of entrapment will be invoked.