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

• In re Standard Jury Instructions IN Crim. Case-Report NO. 2015-05
  195 So. 3d 1088· Fla.· 2016-04-07 ·cited 9×
  The Florida Supreme Court approved amendments to seventeen existing standard criminal jury instructions and adopted two new instructions relating to sexual offender and sexual predator registration requirements. The Court rejected constitutional challenges raised by the Florida A
• Michaels v. Loftus
  139 So. 3d 324· Fla. 3d DCA· 2014-04-02 ·cited 9×
  Alexander Michaels, an attorney, was found in direct criminal contempt for two acts toward opposing counsel during a probation violation hearing: making a hand gesture and mumbling profanities in Romanian. The Florida appellate court granted his habeas petition as to the hand ges
• Donohue v. State
  925 So. 2d 1163· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-04-26 ·cited 9×
  Daniel Donohue appeals his conviction and sentence for indecent assault. The court affirmed his conviction but remanded for resentencing because the trial court improperly imposed an upward departure based on aggravating circumstances (victim vulnerability) that were neither foun
• Carrin v. State
  875 So. 2d 719· Fla. 1st DCA· 2004-06-07 ·cited 9×
  Raymond Carrin was convicted of aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer after nearly running over a police officer with his car while evading arrest. The appellate court reversed the conviction for insufficient evidence, finding the conviction could not stand because the
• Gilson v. State
  795 So. 2d 105· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-08-01 ·cited 9×
  William Gilson was convicted of lewd and lascivious battery and sentenced to 101.7 months imprisonment. On appeal, he challenged the trial judge's post-conviction finding of sexual penetration—used to increase sentencing guideline points—as a violation of due process under Appren
• Smith v. State
  746 So. 2d 1162· Fla. 1st DCA· 1999-12-01 ·cited 9×
  Patrick Smith was convicted of first degree murder and armed robbery in connection with a robbery that resulted in a death. Smith appealed, challenging the trial court's admission of his codefendant Tipton's pretrial statement. The appellate court found the admission violated bot
• A.L. v. State
  675 So. 2d 703· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-06-26 ·cited 9×
  A juvenile was adjudicated delinquent for trespass at a convenience store, but the appellate court reversed because the State failed to prove that the juvenile actually entered the convenience store property. The court held that mere presence in an adjacent pizza parlor and subse
• Dowis v. State
  578 So. 2d 860· Fla. 5th DCA· 1991-05-02 ·cited 9×
  The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed a contempt order against a defendant for failure to pay child support, holding that the order improperly mixed criminal and civil contempt concepts and failed to comply with legal requirements for each type of contempt proceedin
• United States v. Nolasco
  926 F.2d 869· 9th Cir.· 1991-02-15 ·cited 9×
  The court held that trial judges should not be required to explain the reasonable doubt standard beyond stating the phrase itself.
• Brown v. Dugger
  831 F.2d 1547· 11th Cir.· 1987-11-13 ·cited 9×
  The court held that limiting cross-examination into a witness's potential deal with the state violated the Confrontation Clause and was not harmless error.
• United States v. Bass
  784 F.2d 1282· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-18 ·cited 9×
  A district court cannot instruct the jury that a defendant is an employee as a matter of law when employee status is an essential element of the charged offense, as this usurps the jury's fact-finding role and directs a verdict on an element of the crime.
• United States v. Hicks
  748 F.2d 854· 4th Cir.· 1984-11-07 ·cited 9×
  The dissenting judge believes the trial court's failure to give an alibi instruction was harmless error due to overwhelming evidence of guilt and weak alibi evidence.
• United States v. Marsh
  747 F.2d 14· 1st Cir.· 1984-10-04 ·cited 9×
  The court affirmed the district court's conclusion that the defendants knew the contraband's destination was the United States, based on sufficient circumstantial evidence.
• Williams v. State
  158 Fla. 415· Fla.· 1947-01-17 ·cited 9×
  Three defendants were convicted of entering without breaking with intent to commit grand larceny and sentenced to five years imprisonment plus costs or thirty additional days. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and sentences, rejecting challenges to both the legal
• Burris v. State
  748 So. 2d 332· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-12-01 ·cited 8×
  A trial court's determination that a peremptory strike explanation is genuine and not pretextual is reviewed for clear error only; an explanation that a juror cannot comprehend the proceedings is a proper basis for a peremptory strike when the trial court observed confusion and d
• Lepore v. Jenne
  708 So. 2d 980· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-03-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court erred in ordering pretrial detention without bond based on a violation of release conditions, as the state failed to prove the necessary statutory grounds for detention beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Ortiz v. State
  654 So. 2d 1002· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-05-10 ·cited 8×
  The exclusion of testimony crucial to the defendant's entrapment defense was not harmless error, requiring a new trial for that defendant.
• Johnston v. Singletary
  640 So. 2d 1102· Fla.· 1994-06-23 ·cited 8×
  David Eugene Johnston, a death row inmate, challenged the constitutionality of the heinous, atrocious, or cruel jury instruction used at his 1984 sentencing after a federal habeas court found it infirm under Espinosa v. Florida. The Florida Supreme Court held the challenge proced
• Stewart v. State
  620 So. 2d 177· Fla.· 1993-05-13 ·cited 8×
  Kenneth Allen Stewart appeals his death sentence imposed at resentencing following remand for a new penalty phase hearing. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the death sentence, finding that while certain trial errors occurred, they were either harmless or procedurally barred.
• United States v. Hartsfield
  976 F.2d 1349· 10th Cir.· 1992-10-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of gang membership and prior drug dealings, denying motions for mistrial, and utilizing mass jury selection, and that sufficient evidence supported the conspiracy conviction.
• United States v. Garza
  980 F.2d 546· 9th Cir.· 1992-06-29 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the arrest was supported by probable cause, the search warrant was valid, the evidence was sufficient, and jury instructions were adequate or any errors were harmless.
• S.G. v. State
  591 So. 2d 294· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-12-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the record did not support the trial court's finding that the appellant's actions showed intent to rob, thus reversing the adjudication of delinquency.
• Clark v. Ricketts
  942 F.2d 567· 9th Cir.· 1991-08-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant's Sixth Amendment right of confrontation was not violated by the concealment of a witness's identity and address, and that his Fifth and Sixth Amendment claims regarding a presentence interview were either frivolous or procedurally barred. The co
• United States v. Eberspacher
  936 F.2d 387· 8th Cir.· 1991-06-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in calculating the defendant's sentence by attributing additional kilograms of cocaine based on wrappers and by applying a firearm enhancement despite a prior acquittal on a weapons charge.
• Morrison v. Duckworth
  929 F.2d 1180· 7th Cir.· 1991-04-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that even if the state court erred by admitting a nontestifying codefendant's confession, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to the appellant's own incriminating statements.
• van Gotum v. State
  569 So. 2d 773· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-10-03 ·cited 8×
  Paul Joseph Van Gotum, Sr., a deputy sheriff, was convicted of kidnapping, grand theft, and aggravated battery after confining his former girlfriend and stealing her car. The appellate court affirmed all three convictions, holding that although the trial court erred in instructin
• United States v. Meggers
  912 F.2d 246· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-22 ·cited 8×
  Sentencing a defendant for offense conduct known to the prosecution before trial but not charged in the indictment violates due process.
• Floyd v. Meachum
  907 F.2d 347· 2d Cir.· 1990-06-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the cumulative effect of the prosecutor's repeated and improper remarks during summation was so prejudicial as to render the trial fundamentally unfair, denying the defendant his constitutional due process rights.
• Hendrickson v. State
  556 So. 2d 440· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-01-17 ·cited 8×
  Richard Hendrickson was convicted of sexual battery upon a child and lewd conduct. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed his convictions because the trial judge unconstitutionally instructed jurors that they could not request testimony be read back during deliberations, wh
• United States v. Weddell
  804 F.2d 1343· 5th Cir.· 1986-11-17 ·cited 8×
  The court granted the government's petition for rehearing to clarify the scope of the remand, allowing an adversary hearing on allegations of prosecutorial misconduct.
• United States v. Milford Eugene Slader
  791 F.2d 655· 8th Cir.· 1986-05-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that any errors in admitting the defendant's statement or witness testimony were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for first-degree murder.
• United States v. Viafara-Rodriguez
  729 F.2d 912· 2d Cir.· 1984-02-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury instructions, when viewed as a whole, adequately informed the jury that the government's burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt applied to each element of the charged offenses, despite potentially confusing language.
• Howze v. Marshall
  716 F.2d 396· 6th Cir.· 1983-09-09 ·cited 8×
  Placing the burden on a defendant to prove insanity by a preponderance of the evidence does not violate due process, provided the state proves all elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Martin v. Strasburg
  689 F.2d 365· 2d Cir.· 1982-09-20 ·cited 8×
  New York's preventive detention law for accused juvenile delinquents is unconstitutional because it permits liberty to be denied prior to adjudication of guilt based on unfettered discretion and uncertain predictions of future behavior.
• United States v. Alphonse Lewis, Jr.
  651 F.2d 1163· 6th Cir.· 1981-06-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant waived objections to the agent's testimony by failing to object promptly, and the prosecutor's isolated remark in closing argument was not prejudicial.
• United States v. Arias
  639 F.2d 1183· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Government sufficiently proved the seized substance was L-cocaine beyond a reasonable doubt and that Arias's conviction for telephone use was not impermissibly inconsistent with his acquittal on other charges.
• Simons v. State
  389 So. 2d 262· Fla. 1st DCA· 1980-10-07 ·cited 8×
  Simons was convicted of robbery based partly on eyewitness identification testimony following an uncounseled arraignment where the witness was present. The court reverses and remands, holding that the prosecution violated the Sixth Amendment by deliberately bringing the witness t
• United States v. Kelley
  615 F.2d 378· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in allowing bank officers to testify about the capacity of loan documents to influence the bank's decisions, nor in its jury instructions.
• United States v. Kennedy
  578 F.2d 196· 7th Cir.· 1978-06-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the government is not required to rebut expert testimony with its own expert witnesses and that lay testimony or cross-examination can suffice to allow a jury to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Coney v. State
  348 So. 2d 672· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-08-09 ·cited 8×
  Jimmy Lee Coney appeals his conviction on four serious felonies, including involuntary sexual battery of a child, robbery, burglary, and attempted premeditated murder, arguing various trial errors. The Third District Court of Appeal affirms the conviction and 130-year sentence, f
• United States v. Johnson
  553 F.2d 901· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that even if the initial entry or search was illegal, the admission of the seized evidence was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming independent evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Ada Dean Curry
  530 F.2d 636· 5th Cir.· 1976-04-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction of Ada Dean Curry, but affirmed the convictions of the other nine appellants.
• United States v. Joiner
  496 F.2d 1314· 5th Cir.· 1974-07-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for escape, and that the jury instructions and admission of evidence were not erroneous.
• Marshall v. Rose
  499 F.2d 1163· 6th Cir.· 1974-06-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the admission of the victim's in-court identification was not harmless error because it was tainted by an unconstitutional showup conducted without counsel, and the state failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the identification had an independe
• Trowell v. State
  288 So. 2d 506· Fla. 1st DCA· 1973-12-27 ·cited 8×
  Robert Trowell was convicted of manslaughter for shooting Raymond Jones, but the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed because the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Raymond Jones was dead and the identity of the deceased, essential elements of corpus delict
• United States v. Fisher
  484 F.2d 868· 4th Cir.· 1973-09-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the prosecution's failure to call a material witness was not error.
• United States v. Brooks
  473 F.2d 817· 9th Cir.· 1973-02-09 ·cited 8×·via Guilt Beyond A Reasonable Doubt
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that no plain error occurred regarding evidence not objected to below.
• United States v. Rhodes
  433 F.2d 1307· 8th Cir.· 1970-11-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to infer possession of the stolen vehicle, supporting the conviction for transporting it in interstate commerce.
• United States v. Rody Charles Grey
  422 F.2d 1043· 6th Cir.· 1970-02-24 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed Williams' conviction but vacated Grey's conviction and remanded for a new trial due to prosecutorial misconduct.
• United States v. Swarthout
  420 F.2d 831· 6th Cir.· 1970-01-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the conviction must be set aside because the alleged concealment of property occurred before a tax assessment and notice and demand for payment, meaning no levy was authorized under 26 U.S.C. § 6331 at the time of the alleged offense.