Beyond A Reasonable Doubt

1,106 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 13 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Delbert Lee Tibbs v. State
  397 So. 2d 1120· Fla.· 1981-04-09 ·cited 738×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that appellate courts may reverse convictions only on grounds of legal insufficiency of evidence or trial error, not on the subjective ground that evidence weight is tenuous. The Court eliminated a purported third category of reversals based on evid
• Goodwin v. State
  751 So. 2d 537· Fla.· 1999-12-16 ·cited 529×
  The Florida Supreme Court consolidated two cases to address whether section 924.051(7) of the Florida Statutes abrogated the harmless error analysis established in State v. DiGuilio. The Court held that the statute merely reaffirms existing harmless error standards and does not s
• Mullaney v. Wilbur
  W.D. Pa.· 1975-06-09 ·cited 447×
  The Court's opinion, which the concurring justice joins, holds that the prosecution must prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt, but this does not conflict with the principle that a defendant may bear the burden of proving an affirmative defense like insanity.
• Curley v. United States
  160 F.2d 229· D.C. Cir.· 1947-01-13 ·cited 353×
  The court held that the jury's verdict of guilt against the appellant was not supported by sufficient evidence to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.
• Jackson v. State
  648 So. 2d 85· Fla.· 1994-04-21 ·cited 314×
  Andrea Hicks Jackson was convicted of murdering a Jacksonville police officer in 1983 and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court vacated her death sentence because the jury instruction on the "cold, calculated, and premeditated" (CCP) aggravating factor was unconstitutiona
• Holton v. State
  573 So. 2d 284· Fla.· 1990-09-27 ·cited 264×
  Rudolph Holton appeals his conviction for first-degree murder and death sentence, along with convictions for arson and sexual battery. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the murder conviction and death penalty but remands for resentencing on the arson and sexual battery conviction
• United States v. Thevis
  665 F.2d 616· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-11 ·cited 261×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in admitting Underhill's grand jury testimony under a hearsay exception and that the conspiracy charge under 18 U.S.C. § 241 was valid.
• Craig v. State
  510 So. 2d 857· Fla.· 1987-05-28 ·cited 245×
  Craig was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the premeditated murders of John Eubanks and Walton Farmer during a planned scheme to gain control of a cattle ranch. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but vacated and remanded th
• Ford v. Strickland
  696 F.2d 804· 11th Cir.· 1983-01-07 ·cited 214×
  The court held that the Florida Supreme Court's practice of considering non-record material on direct appeal in capital cases violates due process, and that failure to require full resentencing after invalidating aggravating factors is an error.
• United States v. Fioravanti
  412 F.2d 407· 3d Cir.· 1969-06-16 ·cited 197×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction should be affirmed because the Allen Charge, while generally disfavored, was not so prejudicial in this specific instance as to warrant reversal, and future use of such charges is prohibited.
• Special v. W. Boca Med. Ctr.
  160 So. 3d 1251· Fla.· 2014-11-13 ·cited 194×
  The Florida Supreme Court clarified the test for harmless error in civil appeals, holding that the beneficiary of an error must prove there is no reasonable possibility the error contributed to the verdict. Applying this test, the Court reversed a medical malpractice judgment and
• United States v. Taylor
  464 F.2d 240· 2d Cir.· 1972-07-06 ·cited 176×
  The court held that the standard of evidence necessary for a judge to send a case to the jury is not the same in civil and criminal cases, and that the 'Second Circuit rule' requiring a single standard is overruled.
• United States v. McPARTLIN
  595 F.2d 1321· 7th Cir.· 1979-03-26 ·cited 172×
  The court held that the admission of certain testimony and grand jury statements was proper, and that the evidence against defendant Bull was sufficient to sustain his conviction.
• State v. Marshall
  476 So. 2d 150· Fla.· 1985-08-30 ·cited 157×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that prosecutors' comments on a defendant's failure to testify constitute error but may be reviewed under the harmless error doctrine rather than resulting in automatic reversal. The Court overruled its prior precedent requiring per se reversal and
• Abraham v. Baldwin
  52 Fla. 151· Fla.· 1906-06-01 ·cited 157×
  In this slander case, the Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment against defendants who called the plaintiff a thief and accused him of stealing a hoe, holding that the trial court erred by withdrawing from the jury the question of whether the statements constituted a privileg
• United States v. Bowdach
  561 F.2d 1160· 5th Cir.· 1977-10-26 ·cited 154×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the arrest was valid, the search was a permissible security sweep, and the defendant was not denied a speedy trial.
• United States v. Watson
  594 F.2d 1330· 10th Cir.· 1979-02-15 ·cited 149×
  The dissent argues that the evidence presented does not support a conspiracy conviction for the defendants.
• Hill v. Humphrey
  662 F.3d 1335· 11th Cir.· 2011-11-22 ·cited 148×
  The concurring opinion argues that the petitioner's claim, alleging a due process violation in a state post-conviction proceeding, is not cognizable in federal habeas corpus. While acknowledging the Supreme Court precedent prohibiting the execution of mentally retarded individual
• United States v. Kikumura
  918 F.2d 1084· 3d Cir.· 1990-11-02 ·cited 148×
  A sentencing judge cannot make extreme departures from guidelines without procedural fairness. The Government's manipulation of charges and sentencing may violate due process.
• In re Preer Beverly
  342 So. 2d 481· Fla.· 1977-01-27 ·cited 148×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Section 394.467 authorizing involuntary psychiatric hospitalization on grounds of mental illness and dangerousness or incapacity, but reversed the trial court's order committing Beverly Preer for lack of clear and convinci
• United States v. Alvarez
  625 F.2d 1196· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-17 ·cited 136×
  The evidence was sufficient to convict Alvarez of conspiring to import marijuana, as his actions and assurances indicated knowledge of and participation in the illegal scheme.
• United States v. Seale
  461 F.2d 345· 7th Cir.· 1972-05-11 ·cited 135×
  The court held that a defendant is entitled to a jury trial for contempt charges if the aggregate sentence for multiple contemptuous acts exceeds six months, and that the trial judge should have inquired into the defendant's objections to his appointed counsel.
• United States v. DeSIMONE
  660 F.2d 532· 5th Cir.· 1981-11-02 ·cited 133×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support DeSimone's conviction for conspiracy and importation, requiring reversal. However, the evidence was sufficient to support Waldon's conviction for conspiracy and importation.
• Demetree v. State of Fla. ex rel. John D. Marsh
  89 So. 2d 498· Fla.· 1956-09-12 ·cited 132×
  James Demetree appealed a contempt conviction and six-month jail sentence for violating an injunction that prohibited operating the Demetree Hotel as a house of prostitution. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the contempt proceeding was criminal in nature and that
• United States v. Franz Byrd
  352 F.2d 570· 2d Cir.· 1965-11-16 ·cited 130×
  The court held that the trial judge's failure to explicitly list criminal intent as an essential element for conviction was not reversible error, as general intent instructions were sufficient and the defense did not contest intent.
• Duest v. State
  855 So. 2d 33· Fla.· 2003-06-26 ·cited 127×
  Duest appeals a death sentence reimposed after the previous death sentence was vacated due to a defective prior conviction aggravator. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the death sentence, holding that the trial court properly instructed the jury on aggravating circumstances, pro
• Wright v. United States
  250 F.2d 4· D.C. Cir.· 1957-10-30 ·cited 124×
  The majority reversed the conviction, finding that reasonable jurors could not conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was sane at the time of the shooting, despite the jury's verdict.
• Hughes v. State
  901 So. 2d 837· Fla.· 2005-04-28 ·cited 123×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the Apprendi v. New Jersey rule—requiring jury determination of facts that increase a sentence beyond the statutory maximum—does not apply retroactively to convictions that became final before Apprendi was decided. The court applied the Witt re
• Rivera v. State
  717 So. 2d 477· Fla.· 1998-06-11 ·cited 121×
  Michael T. Rivera, a death row inmate, challenged his capital conviction and sentence through a Rule 3.850 post-conviction motion. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed most of the trial court's denials but reversed the summary denial regarding penalty phase ineffective assistance o
• United States v. Scott
  425 F.2d 55· 9th Cir.· 1970-03-06 ·cited 118×
  The court should exercise its discretion against applying the plain error rule when a defendant fails to object to a presumption instruction and their guilt is evident.
• United States v. Barber
  442 F.2d 517· 3d Cir.· 1971-04-14 ·cited 114×
  The court held that while evidence was sufficient to convict some defendants, it was insufficient for others, and that while the identification jury instructions were not reversible error, new guidelines are needed for future cases.
• Jones v. State
  998 So. 2d 573· Fla.· 2008-12-23 ·cited 113×
  Harry Jones was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for a 1991 killing. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion and denied his habeas corpus petition, finding no Brady/Giglio violations, no prejudicia
• J.B. Parker v. State
  873 So. 2d 270· Fla.· 2004-01-22 ·cited 113×
  J.B. Parker appeals his death sentence imposed following a new penalty phase after his original sentence was vacated due to Brady violations. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Parker's convictions for kidnapping, robbery, and first-degree murder, as well as his death sentence, r
• Routly v. State
  440 So. 2d 1257· Fla.· 1983-09-22 ·cited 113×
  Dan Edward Routly appeals his conviction for first-degree murder and death sentence imposed despite a jury recommendation of life imprisonment. The Florida Supreme Court upholds both the conviction and death sentence, finding the trial court properly applied five aggravating circ
• Brown v. State
  367 So. 2d 616· Fla.· 1979-02-01 ·cited 112×
  Henry Brown was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death despite a jury's advisory recommendation of life imprisonment. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the conviction but vacated the death sentence, holding that the jury's life recommendation must ordinarily be fo
• Leronnie Lee Walton v. State
  208 So. 3d 60· Fla.· 2016-12-01 ·cited 110×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the First District Court of Appeal's decision affirming Leronnie Lee Walton's convictions for attempted murder and armed robbery of law enforcement officers. The court held that mandatory minimum sentences under the 10-20-Life statute need not r
• Guzman v. State
  721 So. 2d 1155· Fla.· 1998-10-01 ·cited 104×
  James Guzman was convicted of first-degree murder and armed robbery in the death of David Colvin and sentenced to death. This was Guzman's second trial after his initial convictions were reversed due to a conflict of interest with his public defender. The Florida Supreme Court af
• D.A. v. State
  471 So. 2d 147· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-06-11 ·cited 100×
  A juvenile was adjudicated delinquent for loitering and prowling under Florida law after being found near a stolen van. The appellate court reversed, holding that the state failed to prove the essential elements of the offense because the juvenile's conduct pointed exclusively to
• United States v. Hernandez-Palacios
  838 F.2d 1346· 5th Cir.· 1988-01-07 ·cited 98×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support convictions for conspiracy and the Travel Act, but sufficient for possession and importation of marijuana.
• Griffis v. State
  509 So. 2d 1104· Fla.· 1987-07-16 ·cited 97×
  The Florida Supreme Court answered a certified question regarding sentencing guidelines departures, holding that a trial court's statement that it would depart for any one of several reasons, some valid and some invalid, does not satisfy the Albritton standard for affirming sente
• Tura Yohn v. State
  476 So. 2d 123· Fla.· 1985-07-11 ·cited 96×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that when an insanity defense is raised, the trial court must clearly instruct the jury that the state bears the burden of proving the defendant's sanity beyond a reasonable doubt once the presumption of sanity is rebutted by evidence. The standard
• 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.
• Richardson v. State
  604 So. 2d 1107· Fla.· 1992-04-09 ·cited 95×
  Tommy Richardson appeals his first-degree murder conviction and death sentence for killing Irene Newton during a domestic dispute on New Year's Eve 1989. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the conviction but reduces the sentence to life imprisonment without parole for 25 years aft
• United States v. Guerra
  888 F.2d 247· 2d Cir.· 1989-10-23 ·cited 94×
  The preponderance of the evidence standard satisfies due process for determining "relevant conduct" under the Sentencing Guidelines, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Battjes v. United States
  172 F.2d 1· 6th Cir.· 1949-02-03 ·cited 94×
  The court held that the appellant willfully attempted to evade income taxes by failing to report substantial income from gravel sales and a real estate transaction, and that the sale of raw gravel did not constitute a capital asset transaction.
• Marbel Mendoza v. State
  700 So. 2d 670· Fla.· 1997-10-16 ·cited 93×
  Marbel Mendoza appealed his death sentence for the first-degree murder of mini-market owner Conrado Calderon during a robbery attempt. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence, finding sufficient evidence of guilt and proper application of aggravating
• Deiterle v. State
  101 Fla. 79· Fla.· 1931-04-03 ·cited 93×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a second-degree murder conviction because the trial court improperly admitted testimony from a court reporter about the defendant's prior statements before the corpus delicti was established. This testimony was crucial for proving the identity o
• United States v. Downen
  496 F.2d 314· 10th Cir.· 1974-04-23 ·cited 92×
  The court held that there was substantial evidence to support the jury's guilty verdicts and that the trial court did not err in its handling of a demonstrative exhibit or in its jury instructions.
• United States v. Diggs
  649 F.2d 731· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-29 ·cited 91×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that evidence seized from an abandoned motel room was admissible, the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict, and the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• United States v. Lemon
  550 F.2d 467· 9th Cir.· 1977-03-08 ·cited 89×
  The court held that the admission of pre-Miranda statements was harmless error, the consent to search was voluntary and not a Miranda violation, and the defendant received effective assistance of counsel.