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

• Williams v. State
  674 So. 2d 885· Fla. 2d DCA· 1996-05-29 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction for loitering and prowling because the officer could not articulate specific facts showing an imminent threat to public safety. The court also struck certain costs, probation conditions, and restitution due
• Meeks v. State
  667 So. 2d 1002· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-02-14 ·cited 11×
  Vincent Meeks appealed his conviction for first degree murder and two counts of attempted first degree murder. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the murder conviction but reversed and remanded the attempted murder convictions because the jury verdict form failed to sp
• Golden v. State
  629 So. 2d 109· Fla.· 1993-11-10 ·cited 11×
  Andrew Lee Golden was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for drowning his wife in a lake. The Florida Supreme Court vacated the conviction and directed his release, finding that the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the death resulted from
• Vergara v. State
  486 So. 2d 14· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-03-11 ·cited 11×
  Three defendants appealed their convictions and sentences on multiple grounds, including alleged prosecutorial misconduct, evidentiary errors, ineffective assistance of counsel from joint representation, and sentencing guideline departures. The Third District Court of Appeal affi
• Mallette v. Scully
  752 F.2d 26· 2d Cir.· 1984-12-28 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction for manslaughter beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the sentencing judge did not impermissibly punish the defendant for refusing to cooperate.
• Williams v. Duckworth
  738 F.2d 828· 7th Cir.· 1984-06-27 ·cited 11×
  The Indiana Supreme Court correctly found sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding that the defendant had accumulated two prior unrelated felony convictions for habitual offender sentencing.
• United States v. Bakken
  734 F.2d 1273· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-24 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the market value of the stolen antifreeze is $1.79 per gallon, and there was sufficient evidence to establish that 4,828 gallons were stolen and transported in interstate commerce, meeting the $5,000 jurisdictional threshold.
• Simon v. State
  209 So. 2d 682· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-04-09 ·cited 11×
  Anthony F. Simon appealed two convictions for breaking and entering with assault and robbery. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed both convictions, finding that the state presented sufficient evidence of Simon's identity as the perpetrator through witness testimony base
• United States v. Corrine Brown
  947 F.3d 655· 11th Cir.· 2020-01-09 ·cited 10×
  Former U.S. Representative Corrine Brown was convicted of mail and wire fraud, theft of government funds, and tax violations for misusing over $800,000 in charitable donations intended for scholarships and computers for schools. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed her convictions and u
• A.S.F. v. State
  70 So. 3d 754· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-10-05 ·cited 10×
  A.S.F., a juvenile, was convicted of aggravated battery and strong arm robbery and adjudicated delinquent based on circumstantial evidence. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that A.S.F. actively particip
• Kenta S. Hill v. State
  830 So. 2d 876· Fla. 5th DCA· 2002-10-18 ·cited 10×
  Kenta S. Hill was convicted of selling controlled substances within 1,000 feet of a place of worship. The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed his conviction because the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the referenced church regularly conducted reli
• Cordova v. State
  675 So. 2d 632· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-05-29 ·cited 10×
  Victor Cordova appeals his conviction for indirect criminal contempt for violating a domestic violence injunction, challenging the trial court's use of judicial notice to establish that he was served with the injunction. The court affirms the conviction, holding that while judici
• Ezra Henry v. State
  629 So. 2d 1058· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-12-30 ·cited 10×
  Three defendants were convicted of cocaine trafficking after a traffic stop and vehicle search yielded five cocaine packages. The appellate court reversed due to prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument, where the prosecutor suggested without evidence that defendants were
• M.R. v. State
  610 So. 2d 46· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-12-08 ·cited 10×
  Florida appellate court affirmed a juvenile's delinquency adjudication for simple battery based on circumstantial evidence that the officer saw the juvenile in a throwing motion and was then struck in the head, despite the officer never seeing the actual object thrown.
• United States v. Brigham
  977 F.2d 317· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-08 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the conviction because no sensible juror could find the defendant guilty of conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt based on the evidence presented.
• Robinson v. State
  589 So. 2d 1372· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-11-20 ·cited 10×
  Age-related vulnerability alone is insufficient to justify departure from sentencing guidelines, and it may only be combined with other substantial factors to establish a clear and convincing reason for departure when those factors prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant is
• United States v. Edilberto Mendoza-Acevedo
  950 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1991-11-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant waived his right to a voluntariness hearing by failing to raise the issue pre-trial, and that while the jury instructions' "guilt or innocence" language was problematic, it did not constitute plain error given the charge as a whole.
• United States v. Ocampo
  937 F.2d 485· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to sustain Ocampo's convictions for possession with intent to distribute and conspiracy, but the search warrant was supported by probable cause and the convictions and sentences of Arango and Donato were affirmed.
• United States v. Miroslav Oransky
  908 F.2d 307· 8th Cir.· 1990-07-10 ·cited 10×
• United States ex rel. Bernard Wandick v. James A. Chrans & Neil Hartigan
  869 F.2d 1084· 7th Cir.· 1989-03-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner voluntarily and intelligently waived his right to a jury trial and that sufficient evidence supported his conviction.
• Davis v. Maynard
  869 F.2d 1401· 10th Cir.· 1989-03-14 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the conviction but vacated the death sentence, finding that the jury instructions in the guilt phase did not unconstitutionally shift the burden of proof and that the exclusion of certain venire members was not reversible error. However, the court found the dea
• United States v. Johnstone
  856 F.2d 539· 3d Cir.· 1988-09-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an indictment is sufficient if it states the elements of the offense and fairly informs the defendant, and that the underlying drug felony for a § 843(b) conviction must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, not by a preponderance of the evidence.
• United States ex rel. Steve Shore v. O'Leary
  833 F.2d 663· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because the state court's conviction was supported by sufficient evidence and the petitioner did not demonstrate a constitutional violation or the need for a federal evidentiary hearing.
• Lilton Baker v. Montgomery
  811 F.2d 557· 11th Cir.· 1987-03-02 ·cited 10×
  A jury instruction creating a mandatory presumption of intent to kill, while unconstitutional, can be harmless error if the evidence of guilt is overwhelming and the defendant's defenses are frivolous.
• White v. ARN
  788 F.2d 338· 6th Cir.· 1986-04-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Ohio's statute requiring defendants to prove self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence does not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
• United States v. Smegal
  772 F.2d 659· 10th Cir.· 1985-09-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while a specific instruction on the government's burden to prove lack of entrapment beyond a reasonable doubt is preferable, the jury instructions, when read as a whole, were sufficient to inform the jury of the government's burden.
• Fulton v. Warden, Maryland Penitentiary
  744 F.2d 1026· 4th Cir.· 1984-09-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that although jury instructions on alibi defenses were constitutionally infirm by shifting the burden of proof, the errors were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in both cases, and did not render the trials fundamentally unfair.
• United States v. Hans
  738 F.2d 88· 3d Cir.· 1984-06-19 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the district court's decision to allow the jury to see windbreakers not admitted into evidence was harmless error, and would affirm the conviction.
• White v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  720 F.2d 415· 5th Cir.· 1983-11-28 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of habeas corpus relief, finding that the introduction of psychiatric testimony at the penalty hearing violated the defendant's constitutional rights.
• Young v. Rees
  707 F.2d 935· 6th Cir.· 1983-06-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that any error in admitting testimony regarding the defendant's post-Miranda silence was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Roglieri
  700 F.2d 883· 2d Cir.· 1983-02-15 ·cited 10×
  Evidence of customary practices is sufficient, standing alone, to establish mailing and non-receipt for theft from the mail cases.
• Rhodes v. Foster
  682 F.2d 711· 8th Cir.· 1982-07-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because sufficient evidence supported the conviction and the prosecutor's remarks did not deprive the appellant of a fair trial.
• United States v. Jaynell M. Iverson
  637 F.2d 799· D.C. Cir.· 1980-12-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that any misleading testimony or prosecutorial misconduct was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the defendant's confession was adequately corroborated.
• United States v. Morgan
  562 F.2d 1001· 5th Cir.· 1977-11-11 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on voir dire, suppression of evidence, sufficiency of evidence, or motions for mistrial/severance.
• Buzynski v. Oliver
  538 F.2d 6· 1st Cir.· 1976-07-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that it could not predict with near certainty that the Supreme Court would overrule Leland v. Oregon, which permits states to require defendants to prove insanity by a preponderance of the evidence.
• United States v. Shepard
  538 F.2d 107· 6th Cir.· 1976-06-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction and sentence were valid, rejecting claims regarding competency, sanity, and jury instructions.
• Kibbe v. Henderson
  534 F.2d 493· 2d Cir.· 1976-04-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge's jury instruction on causation, while potentially lacking detail, did not rise to the level of constitutional error requiring federal habeas relief.
• Flores v. Estelle
  513 F.2d 764· 5th Cir.· 1975-05-30 ·cited 10×
  The district court committed plain error by admitting hearsay testimony to prove the non-existence of a toxicology report, and this error was not waived by the petitioners.
• United States v. Weinberg
  478 F.2d 1351· 3d Cir.· 1973-05-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the par value of the stock was sufficient to meet the jurisdictional amount for the conspiracy charge, and that while a suppression hearing should have occurred pre-trial, the error was harmless. However, the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction
• United States v. Green
  463 F.2d 1313· D.C. Cir.· 1972-06-14 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the bifurcated trial was proper and the evidence was sufficient to support the finding of sanity.
• Griff v. Rhay
  455 F.2d 494· 9th Cir.· 1972-02-08 ·cited 10×
  The District Court improperly denied a habeas corpus petition by relying solely on the state Supreme Court's reported opinion without independent review of the record.
• Gonsior v. Craven
  449 F.2d 20· 9th Cir.· 1971-08-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a state trial judge's comment on the evidence, even if expressing an opinion on guilt, does not violate due process if followed by clear instructions that the jury is the exclusive judge of facts and credibility.
• United States
  444 F.2d 248· 10th Cir.· 1971-06-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient, the refusal of writs was not an abuse of discretion, jury instructions were proper, and the response to the jury's question was correct.
• Pacheco v. United States
  367 F.2d 878· 10th Cir.· 1966-10-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to admit a tape recording of an experiment or in refusing a jury instruction, as the experiment lacked similarity of conditions and the instruction was not supported by evidence.
• Fournier v. Balbino Gonzalez
  269 F.2d 26· 1st Cir.· 1959-07-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Puerto Rican Constitution and statutes permitting majority jury verdicts do not violate federal constitutional rights, including due process.
• Blum Vestal Johnson and Commie Allen Johnson v. United States
  265 F.2d 496· 4th Cir.· 1959-04-08 ·cited 10×·via Guilt Beyond A Reasonable Doubt
  The court held that the trial court did not err in overruling the defendants' motions for a directed verdict of acquittal or to set aside the verdict.
• United States v. Bardin
  224 F.2d 255· 7th Cir.· 1955-06-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the dissenting judge's concerns regarding plain errors affecting substantial rights, particularly insufficient jury instructions and prosecutorial misconduct, warranted reversal and a new trial.
• Coleman v. State
  26 Fla. 61· Fla.· 1890-01-01 ·cited 10×
  James Coleman was convicted of murdering Miles Burley by shooting at a festival near Fort Meade, Florida, in 1888. Coleman appealed his life sentence conviction, challenging the trial judge's refusal to give certain jury instructions and arguing the evidence was insufficient to s
• Bell v. State
  336 So. 3d 211· Fla.· 2022-02-03 ·cited 9×
  Jesse Bell was convicted of first-degree murder for killing inmate Donald Eastwood while incarcerated and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and sentence, rejecting arguments that the trial court failed to properly investigate mitigation, improp
• Fuller v. State
  257 So. 3d 521· Fla. 5th DCA· 2018-09-28 ·cited 9×
  Bruce Fuller was convicted of manslaughter with a firearm after admittedly shooting Furrukh Alam in self-defense. The Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that Fuller was entitled to a new trial due to the cumulative and