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

• Ward v. State
  807 So. 2d 808· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-02-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in finding sufficient evidence to prove the defendant's prior DUI conviction beyond a reasonable doubt, even without a certified copy of the conviction itself.
• Khalif Jones v. State
  739 So. 2d 1220· Fla. 1st DCA· 1999-08-05 ·cited 4×
  The Florida appellate court reversed Khalif Jones's convictions for armed robbery, carjacking, and kidnapping because the trial court erred in denying his motion for mistrial after prosecution testimony conveyed the clear inference that a non-testifying codefendant had implicated
• C.J.P. v. State
  672 So. 2d 62· Fla. 1st DCA· 1996-04-16 ·cited 4×
  A juvenile was convicted of being an accessory after the fact to aggravated assault and leaving the scene of an accident with injuries. The court affirmed the accessory conviction but reversed the leaving-the-scene conviction because the juvenile was not the driver of the vehicle
• Green v. State
  667 So. 2d 789· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-01-04 ·cited 4×
  Willie Green was convicted of lewd and lascivious assault and sexual battery of a 14-year-old mentally retarded child based primarily on the child's prior inconsistent statements, which she recanted at trial. The appellate court reversed, holding that a prior inconsistent stateme
• Shields v. Shields
  636 So. 2d 169· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-04-27 ·cited 4×
  Roger Shields was convicted of indirect criminal contempt for allegedly violating a domestic violence injunction by placing a personal notice in a newspaper. The appellate court reversed, finding insufficient evidence that Shields actually placed the notice.
• Messec v. State
  635 So. 2d 89· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-02-02 ·cited 4×
  Defendant Messec appealed his convictions for armed robbery, armed kidnapping, and armed burglary, challenging the trial court's failure to grant a mistrial based on improper prosecutorial comment. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding that although the prosecutor'
• United States v. Frydenlund
  990 F.2d 822· 5th Cir.· 1993-05-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions for bank fraud and conspiracy were supported by sufficient evidence, and their sentences were properly calculated under the sentencing guidelines based on the total overdraft amount.
• DOW v. State
  610 So. 2d 23· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-11-25 ·cited 4×
  Convictions are affirmed for all three defendants; sentences are affirmed for Michael Dow but reversed and remanded for Richard Dow and Eddie Harvey because the trial court imposed departure sentences without recognizing it was departing from sentencing guidelines.
• Flowers v. Ill. Dep't of Corr.
  962 F.2d 703· 7th Cir.· 1992-05-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instructions violated due process and were not harmless error, entitling the petitioner to habeas relief, but that the double jeopardy claim failed due to jury confusion.
• Washington v. Murray
  952 F.2d 1472· 4th Cir.· 1991-12-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding the failure to use exculpatory forensic evidence without an evidentiary hearing, and remanded that claim for further proceedings. Other claims of ineffective assistan
• United States v. Barker
  942 F.2d 585· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for presenting false claims, that the statute does not require an offsetting undercharge, and that the expert witness was qualified.
• Turner v. State
  560 So. 2d 1342· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-05-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to prove the defendant possessed the stolen property, thus reversing the conviction.
• DON v. Crispas C. NIX
  886 F.2d 203· 8th Cir.· 1989-09-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the defendant had a right to attend the deposition, the failure to object properly and the subsequent admission of the deposition were harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• Clausell v. State
  548 So. 2d 889· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-09-19 ·cited 4×
  Jose Clausell appeals his conviction for armed robbery, challenging the admission of a yellow jacket seized during a warrantless second search of his apartment and claiming improper jury-bailiff contact. The court affirms the conviction on harmless error grounds but remands for a
• United States v. Esparza
  876 F.2d 1390· 9th Cir.· 1989-05-31 ·cited 4×
• Humanik v. Beyer
  871 F.2d 432· 3d Cir.· 1989-03-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the New Jersey diminished capacity statute, as applied through the trial court's jury instructions, violated due process by impermissibly shifting the burden of persuasion to the defendant on an issue that negated an element of the crime.
• London v. State
  541 So. 2d 119· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-03-15 ·cited 4×
  John Henry London appeals his fourth murder conviction for the shooting of Alvin Braziel. The appellate court reverses and remands for a new trial, finding that the trial court improperly called witness Ellis Vaughn as a court witness and impeached him with prior inconsistent sta
• Jordan v. Clayton Brokerage Co. OF ST. Louis, Inc.
  861 F.2d 172· 8th Cir.· 1988-10-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the punitive damages award was not excessive and that the admission of evidence concerning a larger fraudulent plan was proper. The court also rejected constitutional challenges to the award.
• Bagby v. Sowders
  853 F.2d 1340· 6th Cir.· 1988-08-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prosecutor's comments were not manifestly intended to reflect the accused's silence and would not naturally and necessarily be understood as such by the jury.
• Corn v. Kemp
  837 F.2d 1474· 11th Cir.· 1988-02-05 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Barker
  806 F.2d 787· 8th Cir.· 1986-12-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict of conviction for conspiring to import, importing, and using mail facilities to import cocaine.
• Isgette v. State
  494 So. 2d 534· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-10-01 ·cited 4×
  Lawrence Isgette appealed his five-year prison sentence imposed after probation revocation for intentionally running over someone with his car. The trial court departed four categories from the guideline sentence, but the appellate court found three of the four reasons for depart
• United States v. W.T.T. (a juvenile)
  800 F.2d 780· 8th Cir.· 1986-09-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the government presented sufficient evidence to support the juvenile's adjudication of delinquency for simple assault, assault by striking, beating, and wounding, and robbery.
• Watson v. Marshall
  784 F.2d 722· 6th Cir.· 1985-12-26 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge believes the prosecutor's actions and defense counsel's inactions deprived the appellant of a fair trial, warranting a retrial or release.
• United States v. Goodpaster
  769 F.2d 374· 6th Cir.· 1985-08-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prosecution failed to prove that the defendant attempted to execute a scheme to defraud, as the defendant was legally entitled to the payments due to the insurer's failure to provide proper notice of cancellation under Kentucky law.
• United States v. Sabino de Leon
  768 F.2d 629· 5th Cir.· 1985-08-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the standard of review for sufficiency of evidence in a federal juvenile adjudication is identical to that in federal criminal appeals, requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Peeler v. Wyrick
  734 F.2d 378· 8th Cir.· 1984-05-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that even if witness intimidation occurred, its impact was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt, thus affirming the denial of the habeas corpus petition.
• United States v. Nordstrom
  730 F.2d 556· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instructions on criminal intent, including the concept of willful blindness, were proper and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction for aiding a federal prisoner's escape.
• United States v. Alf Robert LEE
  729 F.2d 1142· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions, that sufficient evidence supported the finding of sanity, and that the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion.
• Padron-Canto v. State
  414 So. 2d 1151· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-06-08 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Dearmore
  672 F.2d 738· 9th Cir.· 1982-03-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a conspiracy to attempt a crime is an indictable offense, but reversed the convictions due to inadequate jury instructions on entrapment.
• United States v. ONE Assortment OF 89 Firearms
  669 F.2d 206· 4th Cir.· 1982-01-26 ·cited 4×
  The forfeiture is civil in nature and not barred by the prior acquittal on criminal charges due to differing standards of proof.
• L. S. v. State
  391 So. 2d 329· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-12-16 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Brunk
  587 F.2d 910· 8th Cir.· 1978-11-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a judge's ex parte communication with the jury, even if concerning a discretionary matter like replaying evidence, creates a presumption of prejudice that the government must overcome.
• Lopez v. Curry
  583 F.2d 1188· 2d Cir.· 1978-09-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the statute creating a presumption of knowing possession of narcotics from presence in a vehicle is constitutional, the trial judge's instructions improperly shifted the burden of proof to the defendants, violating due process.
• Carter v. State
  331 So. 2d 293· Fla.· 1976-04-21 ·cited 4×
• Engdall v. State
  319 So. 2d 144· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-09-26 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Welch
  496 F.2d 861· 4th Cir.· 1974-04-23 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding the jury's experimental misconduct harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Dessie Thomas, Jr. v. State
  289 So. 2d 419· Fla. 4th DCA· 1974-01-18 ·cited 4×
  Dessie Thomas was convicted of robbery based solely on impeachment testimony from a witness (Morris Williams) whose trial testimony contradicted his prior statement implicating Thomas. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, holding the impeachment was improper because the
• D. R. W. v. State
  271 So. 2d 114· Fla.· 1972-12-13 ·cited 4×
  The standard of proof in the adjudication phase of a juvenile delinquency proceeding, where the offense charged would be a crime if committed by an adult, is the criminal standard of 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.
• United States v. Maxwell
  456 F.2d 1053· 10th Cir.· 1972-03-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant was not entitled to counsel during photographic identification and that the identification procedures were not impermissibly suggestive. The evidence was sufficient to prove knowledge of false endorsements.
• United States v. Alcibiades Garcia Vasquez
  460 F.2d 202· 9th Cir.· 1972-02-25 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge held that the cross-examination regarding the defendant's prior conviction was proper and, even if erroneous, was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• State v. Leevy Carlton Mears, Jr.
  256 So. 2d 217· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-01-04 ·cited 4×
  Florida appeals a trial court's grant of post-conviction relief under Rule 3.850, claiming the trial court erroneously vacated a robbery conviction and sentence based on allegations that the prosecution failed to disclose exculpatory line-up results. The court reverses, finding n
• Lucas v. The State OF Tex.
  451 F.2d 390· 5th Cir.· 1971-11-23 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge believes the case requires fact-finding by a lower court, not appellate review of a cold record, due to disputed facts regarding an in-court identification following a potentially suggestive lineup.
• United States v. Kamber
  458 F.2d 918· 7th Cir.· 1971-11-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for making a false statement to the Selective Service was valid, rejecting all his grounds for appeal.
• Wainwright v. United States
  448 F.2d 984· 10th Cir.· 1971-08-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the post-conviction motion to vacate judgment was properly denied as the appellant's claims were either previously decided on direct appeal or lacked merit.
• Holloway v. COX
  437 F.2d 412· 4th Cir.· 1971-01-29 ·cited 4×
  Federal courts reviewing state convictions via habeas corpus need only determine if 'some evidence' supports the conviction, not re-evaluate proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Taylor v. State OF Ariz.
  424 F.2d 271· 9th Cir.· 1970-03-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas petition without a proper harmless error analysis and potentially without determining exhaustion of state remedies.
• Wolter v. Belicka
  409 F.2d 255· C.C.P.A.· 1969-04-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Wolter's invention was successfully reduced to practice before the senior party's filing date.
• United States v. Heithaus
  391 F.2d 810· 3d Cir.· 1968-03-27 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the conviction on Count II, finding sufficient evidence that the appellant knowingly aided and abetted a scheme involving false loan applications.