Admissibility Of Prior Convictions

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

• Perez v. State
  856 So. 2d 1074· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-10-17 ·cited 9×
  Rafael Perez appeals his convictions for drug trafficking, delivery, and possession of heroin and cocaine following an undercover drug operation. The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirms all convictions, rejecting Perez's arguments regarding evidentiary rulings, discovery viola
• Koris Jennings v. State
  685 So. 2d 879· Fla. 2d DCA· 1996-11-06 ·cited 9×
  Koris Jennings challenged his sexual battery convictions through a Rule 3.850 postconviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The appellate court reversed and remanded on one claim—that counsel misinformed him about impeachment through prior crimes—finding the a
• ORR v. State
  380 So. 2d 1185· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-03-12 ·cited 9×
  Reginald Orr was convicted of grand theft and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon after charges were tried together despite his motion to sever. The Florida appellate court reversed the grand theft conviction, holding that evidence of prior convictions, which was necessa
• Moss v. State
  581 So. 2d 182· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-05-03 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the conviction but reversed the sentence, holding that the trial court was not required to instruct the jury that prior convictions were only for credibility, but that the state must corroborate prior convictions on the scoresheet.
• United States v. Longoria
  624 F.2d 66· 9th Cir.· 1980-05-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress evidence obtained from stopping the taxicab, nor in admitting evidence of the defendant's prior conviction for transporting illegal aliens.
• United States v. Dudley
  562 F.2d 965· 5th Cir.· 1977-11-11 ·cited 8×
  The admission of a prior conviction for a similar offense was proper to prove intent, as its probative value was not substantially outweighed by prejudice.
• United States v. Shaver
  511 F.2d 933· 4th Cir.· 1975-02-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court's alleged errors, including remarks by the district attorney, misstatements in the charge, and failure to give a detailed circumstantial evidence charge, were either harmless or not grounds for reversal.
• Braswell v. State
  306 So. 2d 609· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-01-28 ·cited 8×
  Braswell was convicted of a crime after taking the stand in his own defense and initially denying any prior convictions. The prosecutor later revealed a 24-year-old military court-martial conviction for larceny and elicited an admission from Braswell. The appellate court reversed
• United States v. Binger
  469 F.2d 275· 9th Cir.· 1972-10-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the district court erred in allowing the prosecutor to ask a co-conspirator about his guilty plea to the same count for which the defendant was being tried without a proper cautionary instruction, the error was harmless given the overwhelming evidence of
• Harley v. United States
  377 F.2d 172· D.C. Cir.· 1967-04-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding evidence of prior molestation as too attenuated and did not err in its ruling on the admissibility of prior convictions.
• Smith v. United States
  358 F.2d 683· 3d Cir.· 1966-03-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the admission of prior felony convictions for impeachment was proper when a defendant testifies, and that the appellant's claims of false testimony were unsubstantiated.
• Claunch v. United States
  155 F.2d 261· 5th Cir.· 1946-05-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of prior convictions for impeachment and in its jury instructions, and that the jury verdict was supported by sufficient evidence.
• Hernandez v. Cepeda
  860 F.2d 260· 7th Cir.· 1988-10-14 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the trial court's decision because, despite egregious "harping" by defense counsel, the trial attorney failed to raise a specific objection on that issue, thus waiving it for appeal.
• United States v. Popow
  821 F.2d 483· 8th Cir.· 1987-06-16 ·cited 6×
  Presenting a false identity to enter the United States is punishable under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and prior convictions for similar offenses are admissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) to prove intent and knowledge.
• United States v. Thompson
  806 F.2d 1332· 7th Cir.· 1986-12-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government proved tax evasion beyond a reasonable doubt, the prosecutor's comments were proper, and the admission of prior convictions was permissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence.
• Algar Ferguson v. Judge James A. Knight
  792 F.2d 581· 6th Cir.· 1986-06-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the use of a prior conviction to prove intent to sell in a second offense trafficking charge, without a limiting instruction, did not violate the Constitution under the Jackson v. Virginia standard.
• United States v. Elbert Lee Easley
  505 F.2d 184· 9th Cir.· 1974-09-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the admission of prior conviction evidence and the procedural conference did not warrant reversal.
• United States v. Kowalski
  502 F.2d 203· 7th Cir.· 1974-08-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Title 18, U.S.C. § 922(a)(1) is not unconstitutionally vague and that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict that the defendant was engaged in the business of dealing firearms.
• United States v. Tyson
  470 F.2d 381· D.C. Cir.· 1972-09-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the admission of a prior conviction was proper to show predisposition and that carbon copies of a report were admissible under the Jencks Act and best evidence rule.
• United States v. Baber
  447 F.2d 1267· D.C. Cir.· 1971-07-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting a prior robbery conviction for impeachment and that there is no constitutional right to oral appellate argument.
• United States v. Mills
  440 F.2d 647· 6th Cir.· 1971-04-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to provide a jury list prior to trial, in searching the defendant's automobile, or in allowing cross-examination regarding prior felony convictions.
• Johnson v. United States
  313 F.2d 953· 8th Cir.· 1963-02-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while some of the appellant's contentions on appeal were frivolous, others regarding counsel and self-incrimination warranted further development and presentation.
• Lebron v. State
  894 So. 2d 849· Fla.· 2005-01-13 ·cited 5×
  Jermaine Lebron was convicted of felony murder and robbery, but the guilt phase jury made special findings that someone else shot the victim and Lebron did not possess a firearm at the time of murder. The Florida Supreme Court vacates his death sentence imposed on resentencing be
• Jackson v. State
  832 So. 2d 885· Fla. 3d DCA· 2002-12-18 ·cited 4×
  Dwayne Jackson appeals his burglary conviction, arguing the trial court abused its discretion by denying his motion to reopen his case after the court ruled his prior felony convictions could be used to impeach him. The appellate court reverses and remands, holding that the trial
• Ermon Lee Lane v. State
  706 So. 2d 94· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-02-18 ·cited 4×
  Ermon Lee Lane appealed his conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of his prior felony convictions despite his offer to stipulate to his felon status. The Third District Court
• United States v. Logan
  861 F.2d 859· 5th Cir.· 1988-12-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in granting a new trial because the defendant failed to demonstrate a reasonable probability that the outcome would have been different absent counsel's erroneous advice regarding prior convictions.
• United States v. Vega
  776 F.2d 791· 8th Cir.· 1985-11-08 ·cited 4×
  The trial court erred in denying the motion to exclude evidence of a prior conviction, and the issue is properly before the appellate court.
• Lynwood White v. State
  462 So. 2d 52· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-12-26 ·cited 4×
  Lynwood White appeals his conviction for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding no reversible error regarding the admission of evidence of his prior conviction or a juror's independent view of the crime scene.
• United States v. Lossiah
  537 F.2d 1250· 4th Cir.· 1976-07-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of prior convictions for misdemeanors, which did not bear on truthfulness or involve moral turpitude, was an error that prejudiced the defendant and required a new trial.
• Timmons v. State
  97 Fla. 23· Fla.· 1929-01-18 ·cited 4×
  Paul Timmons was convicted of unlawful possession of intoxicating liquors as a repeat offender in Marion County Circuit Court. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction because the certified copy of the prior conviction admitted as evidence failed to contain an explicit a
• Horton v. State
  943 So. 2d 1016· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-12-15 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of a prior conviction for failure to report a change of address without conducting the required balancing test under section 90.403, Florida Statutes.
• United States v. Sampson
  980 F.2d 883· 3d Cir.· 1992-11-27 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the district court erred by admitting prior drug convictions without a proper articulation of their relevance under Rule 404(b) and without conducting a Rule 403 balancing test.
• United States v. Peden
  961 F.2d 517· 5th Cir.· 1992-05-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of a prior conviction, refusing to admit the victim's welfare records, refusing to quash the kidnapping count, or denying motions for acquittal.
• United States v. Diaz
  936 F.2d 786· 5th Cir.· 1991-07-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove the alien status of the individuals transported and the defendant's knowledge of their illegal status beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Leevonn Cloud v. Trs. OF Boston Univ.
  720 F.2d 721· 1st Cir.· 1983-11-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the university's disciplinary hearing procedures did not violate the student's contract rights or statutory privacy rights, and thus summary judgment for the university was appropriate.
• Dunlap v. State
  404 So. 2d 853· Fla. 2d DCA· 1981-10-14 ·cited 2×
  Charles Dunlap appealed his conviction for robbery with a firearm and life sentence, claiming the trial court erred by denying his motion for mistrial after the prosecutor improperly asked whether he had previously been convicted of robbery. The appellate court affirmed the convi
• United States v. McDONNELL
  573 F.2d 165· 3d Cir.· 1978-03-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in rejecting the defendant's proposed voir dire questions, as the questions asked by the judge substantially addressed the same issues.
• Campbell v. United States
  538 F.2d 692· 5th Cir.· 1976-09-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding his 1967 and 1972 convictions lacked merit, and the district court correctly denied relief.
• United States v. Hays
  525 F.2d 455· 7th Cir.· 1975-09-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to admit certain 'home environment' evidence and in admitting evidence of a prior conviction for similar offenses.
• United States v. Morgan
  476 F.2d 928· D.C. Cir.· 1973-03-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to allow impeachment of the complaining witness with a prior conviction for making a false police report, and this error was not harmless.
• Carter v. United States
  379 F.2d 147· D.C. Cir.· 1967-03-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of parts of an in-custody statement for impeachment and prior convictions for credibility, when considered with the entire record, did not warrant reversal.
• United States ex rel. Edward Gist v. Rundle
  371 F.2d 407· 3d Cir.· 1967-01-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of a prior conviction for a concealed weapon offense, even if prejudicial, did not deprive the appellant of due process or effective assistance of counsel under the circumstances.
• State v. Hester
  319 So. 3d 126· Fla. 3d DCA· 2021-03-24 ·cited 1×
  The State appeals a trial court's post-conviction order vacating a jury verdict for attempted second-degree murder based on ineffective assistance of counsel. The defendant claimed his trial counsel ineffectively withdrew a Stand Your Ground immunity motion to avoid having the de
• Marshall v. State
  277 So. 3d 756· Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-08-13 ·cited 1×
  Terry L. Marshall III appealed an order denying his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion for ineffective assistance of counsel. Marshall was convicted of armed robbery with a firearm after a jury trial. He claimed his counsel was deficient for advising him not to testify to protect h
• Riley v. State
  434 So. 2d 3· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-06-14 ·cited 1×
  The court held that evidence of prior convictions, admissible for the charge of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, is inadmissible for other consolidated offenses. Failure to sever was prejudicial.
• Plaintiff v. Darrell Coleman Cr. ID. No. 1305011774A
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2019-04-23
  The Superior Court denied Darrell Coleman's motion for postconviction relief, finding that his trial counsel was not ineffective. The court determined that Coleman failed to demonstrate prejudice under the Strickland standard, as his own testimony at the evidentiary hearing was u
• Hartley v. State
  946 So. 2d 638· Fla. 2d DCA· 2007-01-19
  Stephen Hartley appealed the denial of his postconviction motion for ineffective assistance of counsel, claiming his trial counsel failed to mitigate the prejudicial effect of his prior convictions and failed to elicit testimony about his previous guilty pleas. The court affirmed
• Mooney v. State
  898 So. 2d 1030· Fla. 1st DCA· 2005-03-11
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of prior DUI convictions when the defense did not open the door.
• Reese v. State
  890 So. 2d 499· Fla. 1st DCA· 2004-12-30
  Raymond Michael Reese was convicted of burglary of an occupied conveyance and robbery by sudden snatching. The appellate court reversed his convictions and remanded for a new trial because the trial court improperly denied Reese the opportunity to testify that his prior convictio
• United States v. Charmley
  764 F.2d 675· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-26
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on duress, denying a mistrial, or ruling on the admissibility of prior convictions for impeachment.