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

• Sebastian v. State
  162 So. 2d 706· Fla. 3d DCA· 1964-04-08 ·cited 8×
  William Sebastian was convicted of unlawful marijuana possession after a bench trial. The Florida appellate court reversed the conviction, finding that the state's evidence failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt where the only eyewitness testimony was sharply contradicte
• United States v. Walker Barrington
  291 F.2d 481· 2d Cir.· 1961-06-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew the packages contained narcotics and possessed them.
• In re Whitney & Co.
  273 F.2d 211· 9th Cir.· 1959-11-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Whitney & Company was guilty of criminal contempt for violating a cease and desist order by indirectly granting a discount in lieu of brokerage in a transaction where it purchased and resold goods for its own account. However, the court found insufficient proo
• Md. & Va. Milk Producers Ass'n, Inc. v. United States
  193 F.2d 907· D.C. Cir.· 1951-11-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Association and distributors' use classification plan, which fixed prices based on milk usage, constituted price fixing in violation of the Sherman Act after they voluntarily withdrew from the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act's regulatory framework.
• Antelope v. United States
  185 F.2d 174· 10th Cir.· 1950-11-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that no reversible error was committed during the trial.
• United States v. Vasilaky
  168 F.2d 191· 2d Cir.· 1948-05-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury charge, despite a minor slip of the tongue and a potentially misleading statement about an accomplice, was sufficient to sustain the verdict, especially since defense counsel approved the charge.
• Sloan v. Peterson
  129 F.2d 330· C.C.P.A.· 1942-06-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that appellant's earlier filed application disclosed the invention, shifting the burden of proof for priority to a preponderance of the evidence. The court also found that appellant's alleged prior art devices did not meet the limitations of the counts.
• United States v. Clark
  32 F.4th 1080· 11th Cir.· 2022-04-28 ·cited 7×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the district court did not err in denying the motion for a new trial based on Brady material, denying the motion to suppress, or in its jury instructions, as any error was invited by the defendant.
• In re Standard Crim. Jury Instructions in Cap. Cases
  214 So. 3d 1236· Fla.· 2017-04-13 ·cited 7×
  This case is a dissenting opinion arguing that the United States Constitution and Supreme Court precedent do not support the Florida Supreme Court's prior holding in Hurst v. State regarding capital sentencing.
• McKENZIE v. State
  125 So. 3d 906· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-04-24 ·cited 7×
  John McKenzie appeals his conviction for armed sexual battery, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress statements made during police interrogation. McKenzie claims the detectives violated his Miranda rights by continuing to question him after he requested a
• Saddie Jones v. State
  4 So. 3d 687· Fla. 1st DCA· 2009-02-12 ·cited 7×
  The appellant was convicted of grand theft and contracting without a license during a state of emergency. The appellate court affirmed the conviction for contracting without a license but reversed the grand theft conviction due to insufficient evidence, finding the state failed t
• Rodrick Sams v. State
  849 So. 2d 1172· Fla. 3d DCA· 2003-07-23 ·cited 7×
  Rodrick Sams appeals his conviction for two counts of sexual battery, four counts of lewd assault on a child, and one count of lewd and lascivious conduct on a child. The appellate court affirmed, rejecting his arguments that the trial court erred in denying his speedy trial dema
• Surdovel v. Jenne
  706 So. 2d 115· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-02-25 ·cited 7×
  The court reversed a no-bond hold because the trial judge failed to make the statutory findings required by Florida law and did not allow the defendant to present evidence before denying bond.
• Walker v. State
  701 So. 2d 1258· Fla. 5th DCA· 1997-12-05 ·cited 7×
  Eddie Walker appealed his cocaine trafficking and delivery convictions, arguing that the prosecutor improperly commented on his failure to present evidence in support of his entrapment defense, thereby violating his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. The appellate court affi
• Palmer v. State
  681 So. 2d 767· Fla. 5th DCA· 1996-09-12 ·cited 7×
  Palmer was convicted of battery on a law enforcement officer. On appeal, the Fifth District Court affirmed his conviction, finding that an attorney-client privilege violation was harmless error and that an Allen-type jury instruction was permissible because both counsel had revie
• United States v. Drake
  932 F.2d 861· 10th Cir.· 1991-05-02 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for wire fraud and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in permitting cross-examination regarding the defendant's educational background.
• United States v. Mandelbaum
  803 F.2d 42· 1st Cir.· 1986-10-15 ·cited 7×
  The court held that while the prosecutor's statement urging the jury to 'do your duty' was improper, it did not constitute reversible error because it was isolated, not severe misconduct, and the evidence of guilt was strong.
• Fid. & Deposit Co. OF Md. v. S. Utils., Inc.
  726 F.2d 692· 11th Cir.· 1984-03-05 ·cited 7×
  A district court cannot grant a directed verdict without a trial when summary judgment is inappropriate and genuine issues of material fact remain.
• Luna v. Beto
  391 F.2d 329· 5th Cir.· 1967-07-11 ·cited 7×
• McKenzie v. State
  333 So. 3d 1098· Fla.· 2022-02-10 ·cited 6×
  The trial court properly denied McKenzie's motion for an interrogatory penalty phase verdict requiring the jury to specify facts supporting aggravating factors, as the required jury finding is only the unanimous finding of the existence of one or more aggravating factors proven b
• Roop v. State
  228 So. 3d 633· Fla. 2d DCA· 2017-10-04 ·cited 6×
  Devin Roop appeals his convictions for throwing a deadly missile at an occupied vehicle and criminal mischief. The key issue is whether the trial court properly admitted a 911 recording in which the victim identified Roop as the perpetrator under the excited utterance exception t
• Vargas v. State
  34 So. 3d 44· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-03-10 ·cited 6×
  Henry Vargas appeals his convictions for dealing in stolen property, operating a chop shop, racketeering, and conspiracy to commit racketeering. The court affirms, holding that sufficient evidence supported the defendant's knowledge of the illegal nature of the chop shop operatio
• Dunlap v. State
  21 So. 3d 873· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-10-28 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed Ted Dunlap's conviction for trafficking in cocaine, rejecting his argument that the prosecutor's single reference to "the truth" in opening statement constituted reversible error. The court held that the prosecutor's comment, p
• Khareem Kerr v. State
  954 So. 2d 692· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-04-18 ·cited 6×
  Khareem Kerr was convicted of burglary of a conveyance after police found him attempting to remove parts from a stolen BMW. The court affirmed his conviction, holding that while presumptions arising from possession of recently stolen property can be rebutted by a facially reasona
• Barker v. State
  877 So. 2d 59· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-06-09 ·cited 6×
  Tom Barker appeals his civil commitment as a sexually violent predator under Florida's Chapter 394, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to bifurcate the trial. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that the jury instructions adequately addressed the
• Sheffield v. State
  794 So. 2d 592· Fla.· 2001-07-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act does not increase the maximum statutory penalty, and therefore Apprendi v. New Jersey does not require proof of a defendant's release to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Labron Cardilia Marshall v. State
  593 So. 2d 1161· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-02-12 ·cited 6×
  Marshall appeals his convictions for capital sexual battery and lewd and lascivious conduct, claiming the trial court erred by failing to conduct a Neil inquiry after the state peremptorily challenged two African-American jurors. The court holds that although a Neil inquiry was r
• United States v. Abroms
  947 F.2d 1241· 5th Cir.· 1991-11-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Abroms of making false material statements to the grand jury, and his testimony was material to the investigation.
• United States v. Carper
  942 F.2d 1298· 8th Cir.· 1991-08-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government's failure to timely disclose defendant's statements was not reversible error without prejudice, and that while some co-conspirator statements were improperly admitted, the errors were harmless. The court reversed one defendant's conspiracy convi
• United States v. Dominguez-Mestas
  929 F.2d 1379· 9th Cir.· 1991-01-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant bears the burden of proving the affirmative defense of duress by a preponderance of the evidence for a charge under 18 U.S.C. § 545, as duress does not negate the knowledge element of the offense.
• Mahorney v. Wallman
  917 F.2d 469· 10th Cir.· 1990-10-24 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's decision, arguing that the prosecutor's remarks, when viewed in the totality of the circumstances, did not deny the defendant due process.
• United States v. Moore
  911 F.2d 140· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-13 ·cited 6×
  The government failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant possessed drugs with the intent to distribute them.
• United States v. McDONALD
  877 F.2d 91· D.C. Cir.· 1989-06-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government failed to present sufficient evidence to convict McDonald of using a juvenile to sell narcotics, but affirmed other convictions.
• Leavitt v. Vasquez
  875 F.2d 260· 9th Cir.· 1989-05-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that even if the jury instruction on aiding and abetting was erroneous, the jury necessarily found the required intent, making the error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States Secret Serv. Special Agent John Mrha v. Cir. Court
  537 So. 2d 182· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-01-18 ·cited 6×
  A Florida appellate court reversed a trial court's criminal contempt conviction of a Secret Service agent who testified about counterfeit credit cards despite a colloquial instruction not to mention them. The court held that the contempt finding lacked the requisite beyond-a-reas
• Bulger v. State
  537 So. 2d 672· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-01-18 ·cited 6×
  Michael Ray Bulger appeals his departure sentence for second degree murder and shooting into an occupied vehicle. The trial court imposed life imprisonment based on finding that Bulger's conduct posed an extreme risk to public safety, but the appellate court holds this reason was
• Knox v. State
  528 So. 2d 1369· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-08-09 ·cited 6×
  Court reversed a thirty-year sentence for strong-arm robbery where the trial court improperly relied on four invalid departure reasons from sentencing guidelines, requiring resentencing based only on three valid reasons.
• United States v. Still
  850 F.2d 607· 9th Cir.· 1988-07-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's actions did not constitute a substantial step toward commission of attempted bank robbery, but affirmed his conviction for interstate transportation of a stolen vehicle.
• Ward v. A.L. Lockhart
  841 F.2d 844· 8th Cir.· 1988-03-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the burglary conviction, violating due process, and that the case should be remanded for an evidentiary hearing on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and improper sentencing.
• United States v. Still
  837 F.2d 871· 9th Cir.· 1988-01-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's actions did not constitute a substantial step toward the commission of attempted bank robbery, reversing the conviction.
• Dick v. Kemp
  833 F.2d 1448· 11th Cir.· 1987-11-24 ·cited 6×
  A jury instruction that unconstitutionally shifted the burden of persuasion on intent was not harmless error because the issue of intent was squarely before the jury and the evidence of intent was not overwhelming.
• Jefferson v. State
  516 So. 2d 33· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-11-24 ·cited 6×
  Jefferson appeals her 15-year manslaughter sentence imposed for beating her 21-month-old daughter to death, arguing insufficient evidence supports the trial court's reasons for departing from the 3-7 year guideline sentence. The court affirms, applying the law of the case doctrin
• Spivey v. State
  512 So. 2d 322· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-09-15 ·cited 6×
  On remand from a prior reversal, the trial court again sentenced Spivey to 15 years imprisonment for violating probation, departing substantially from sentencing guidelines. The appellate court reversed again, finding the departure was based on improper considerations (judicial f
• United States v. McCABE
  812 F.2d 1060· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-02 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict for kidnapping, and that the defendant's motive of revenge satisfied the statutory requirement.
• United States v. Thompson
  807 F.2d 585· 7th Cir.· 1986-12-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government presented sufficient evidence to convict the defendant, the admission of a homemade knife was proper, the restriction of cross-examination was justified, and the voir dire was adequate.
• Juarez v. United Farm Tools, Inc.
  798 F.2d 1341· 10th Cir.· 1986-08-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant manufacturer acted with wanton and reckless disregard of the plaintiff's rights, as required for punitive damages under Colorado law.
• Flowers v. Blackburn
  779 F.2d 1115· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the jury instructions in the first-degree murder trial impermissibly relieved the state of its burden to prove the defendant's specific intent to kill, violating due process.
• PAZ v. State
  480 So. 2d 701· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-12-31 ·cited 6×
  The appellate court reversed a conviction for insurance fraud and grand theft, finding that the state failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt based on circumstantial evidence. The court held that the evidence presented was consistent with a reasonable hypothesis of innoce
• Harris v. Scully
  779 F.2d 875· 2d Cir.· 1985-12-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on justification as it relates to defense of third parties, nor in refusing to instruct on second degree manslaughter.
• United States v. Ortiz
  776 F.2d 864· 9th Cir.· 1985-11-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the denial of the motion for continuance and the denial of the motion for mistrial were not erroneous.