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

• Cobb v. Louie L. Wainwright
  666 F.2d 966· 5th Cir.· 1982-02-04 ·cited 26×
  The court held that Florida Statute § 782.11 is not unconstitutionally vague and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction for unnecessary killing.
• Nelson v. Scully
  672 F.2d 266· 2d Cir.· 1982-01-28 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a jury instruction on the presumption of intent, when viewed in the context of the entire charge which emphasized the presumption of innocence and the state's burden to prove specific intent beyond a reasonable doubt, did not violate due process.
• United States v. Rice
  652 F.2d 521· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-04 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the majority's conclusion that appellants' convictions must be affirmed was erroneous due to multiple errors below.
• United States v. Race
  632 F.2d 1114· 4th Cir.· 1980-09-25 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the defendants' billings for per diem and material handling were authorized by the contract and thus not false, precluding a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1001.
• United States v. Clemens Rolph Johnson
  596 F.2d 842· 9th Cir.· 1979-04-11 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the government retained sufficient supervision and control over federal grant funds to justify convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 641, and that the trial judge did not err in refusing to question jurors about their beliefs regarding the presumption of innocence.
• Pacelli v. United States
  588 F.2d 360· 2d Cir.· 1978-12-05 ·cited 26×
  The court held that while the petitioner raised a constitutional claim regarding "spillover" prejudice from a double jeopardy-barred conspiracy charge, he failed to demonstrate actual prejudice, and therefore the denial of his motion to vacate the substantive convictions is affir
• United States v. Crippen
  570 F.2d 535· 5th Cir.· 1978-03-30 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the questions posed to the defendant before the grand jury were sufficiently clear to support a perjury conviction, and that evidence of prior odometer tampering was properly admissible for impeachment purposes.
• Hollis v. Smith
  571 F.2d 685· 2d Cir.· 1978-01-03 ·cited 26×
  The court modified its prior opinion to allow the State to hold a new hearing regarding parole revocation, considering new allegations of misconduct.
• Hodge v. State
  315 So. 2d 507· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-06-30 ·cited 26×
  Homer Hodge was convicted of manslaughter after being tried for first-degree murder in connection with a fatal shooting at a bar. The appellate court reversed and remanded for acquittal, finding the State's evidence insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt because th
• United States v. Crane
  499 F.2d 1385· 6th Cir.· 1974-07-11 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a tandem trial procedure, where a single jury hears evidence against codefendants first and then hears evidence against the appellant, violates the appellant's constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial.
• State v. R. E. F.
  251 So. 2d 672· Fla. 1st DCA· 1971-08-17 ·cited 26×
  The State of Florida appeals a trial court's dismissal of a rape indictment against a 16-year-old juvenile who had previously been adjudicated delinquent in juvenile court for the same offense. The court holds that juvenile delinquency proceedings are civil in nature and do not b
• United States v. Simon
  424 F.2d 1049· 9th Cir.· 1970-03-30 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the jury instruction allowing an inference of illegal importation from possession was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt given the uncontradicted evidence of knowing possession.
• Julian v. United States
  391 F.2d 279· 9th Cir.· 1968-02-28 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence of possession was insufficient to sustain a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt under the Dyer Act.
• Paivinen v. Sands
  339 F.2d 217· C.C.P.A.· 1964-12-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the Board of Patent Interferences erred in finding Paivinen had not proven reduction to practice and reversed that holding, remanding for further consideration of the burden of proof and support issues.
• McKENZIE v. United States
  126 F.2d 533· D.C. Cir.· 1942-03-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court erred by improperly instructing the jury on the defense of alibi and by failing to explicitly instruct the jury that they must acquit if the government failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Dausch v. State
  141 So. 3d 513· Fla.· 2014-06-12 ·cited 25×
  Carl Dausch was convicted of first-degree murder and aggravated battery in the 1987 cold case death of Adrian Mobley, based primarily on DNA evidence linking him to the victim's car. The Florida Supreme Court vacated his convictions and death sentence, finding the evidence insuff
• Forbes v. State
  933 So. 2d 706· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-07-26 ·cited 25×
  Stacey Forbes, a 19-year-old prospective juror, was convicted of direct criminal contempt of court for giving false answers during voir dire regarding his prior arrests and pending felony drug charge. The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the contempt conviction an
• United States v. Soria
  519 F.2d 1060· 5th Cir.· 1975-09-22 ·cited 25×
• Taylor v. United States
  320 F.2d 843· 9th Cir.· 1963-06-21 ·cited 25×
  The court held that a defendant cannot raise a constitutional challenge to a statute's penalty provision if they were not prejudiced by that provision in their specific case.
• United States v. Curzio
  170 F.2d 354· 3d Cir.· 1948-09-30 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the acquittal on the conspiracy charge was not res judicata for the substantive offenses, and that the trial court's failure to adequately define 'possession' constituted reversible error.
• Smith v. State
  954 So. 2d 1191· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-04-18 ·cited 24×
  Herbert Smith, a public defender supervisor, was found guilty of direct criminal contempt for allegedly disrupting court proceedings and violating a court order to submit a written memorandum. The appellate court reversed, finding insufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt t
• R.J.K. v. State
  928 So. 2d 499· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-05-10 ·cited 24×
  R.J.K., a juvenile, was adjudicated delinquent for burglary of a dwelling and grand theft based on evidence presented by the prosecution. The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reversed the adjudication, finding the evidence insufficient to prove either offense beyond a reas
• United States v. Swanson
  943 F.2d 1070· 9th Cir.· 1991-08-27 ·cited 24×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the conviction, finding that defense counsel's performance, even if erroneous, did not meet the standard for reversal without prejudice under Cronic and would instead apply Strickland's prejudice analysis.
• United States v. Santos
  932 F.2d 244· 3d Cir.· 1991-05-03 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the district court's failure to define 'preponderance of the evidence' and instruct on threats to children did not constitute plain error.
• United States v. Thomas
  914 F.2d 139· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-11 ·cited 24×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding of possession, the government's peremptory challenge was not discriminatory, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a witness's prior conviction or in departing from the Sentencing Guid
• Solomon Monk v. Colonel Gordon N. Zelez
  901 F.2d 885· 10th Cir.· 1990-04-25 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the military judge's reasonable doubt instruction impermissibly lessened the prosecution's burden of proof, violating the defendant's due process rights.
• United States v. Manos
  848 F.2d 1427· 7th Cir.· 1988-06-14 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no abuse of discretion in the trial court's evidentiary rulings, denial of a continuance, or the prosecutor's closing argument.
• Mitchell v. State
  507 So. 2d 686· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-05-14 ·cited 24×
  Ronald Mitchell appealed his sentence, arguing the trial court relied on an inaccurate sentencing guidelines scoresheet and invalid reasons for departing upward from the recommended sentence. The First District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded, finding that four of the five
• United States v. Balistrieri
  778 F.2d 1226· 7th Cir.· 1985-11-20 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in its decisions regarding recusal, jury selection, admission of evidence, or sufficiency of evidence.
• United States v. del Aguila-Reyes
  722 F.2d 155· 5th Cir.· 1983-12-23 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to prove the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Harper
  680 F.2d 731· 11th Cir.· 1982-07-16 ·cited 24×·via Guilt Beyond A Reasonable Doubt
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to sever offenses, that an in-court identification was not impermissibly tainted, that the government's attorney did not improperly assist an identification, and that there was sufficient ev
• Delk v. Atkinson
  665 F.2d 90· 6th Cir.· 1981-11-25 ·cited 24×
  A federal court may grant habeas corpus relief to prevent retrial if a state appellate court, despite finding evidence sufficient, reversed a conviction on other grounds, and the defendant raises a double jeopardy claim based on insufficiency.
• United States ex rel. John Hickey v. Jeffes
  571 F.2d 762· 3d Cir.· 1978-02-13 ·cited 24×
  The district court erred in dismissing the habeas petition on exhaustion grounds, as the issues were presented on direct appeal. One of Hickey's claims for habeas relief is meritorious.
• United States v. Hall
  525 F.2d 1254· 5th Cir.· 1976-01-14 ·cited 24×
  The court held that two jury instructions given at trial were erroneous and prejudicial, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Coppola
  486 F.2d 882· 10th Cir.· 1973-10-25 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a jury instruction on preponderance of the evidence, when viewed in the context of the entire charge, was harmless error, and that pretrial identification procedures were not impermissibly suggestive.
• United States v. Parks
  460 F.2d 736· 5th Cir.· 1972-05-02 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the implicit finding of sanity was contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence, and the district court erred in refusing to grant a new trial.
• State v. Graham
  240 So. 2d 486· Fla. 2d DCA· 1970-10-30 ·cited 24×
  Florida appeals the trial court's suppression of defendant Graham's confession. The appellate court holds that the state must prove by clear and convincing evidence that Miranda warnings were given, were adequate, and that any waiver was knowing and intelligent, and reverses for
• United States v. Crescent-Kelvan Co.
  164 F.2d 582· 3d Cir.· 1948-01-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court's jury instructions were insufficient regarding the definition of 'common or usual name' for misbranding and confusing on the standard of proof (reasonable doubt vs. preponderance of evidence), necessitating reversal.
• Brant Hayward and Vance Hayward v. State
  152 Fla. 608· Fla.· 1943-03-23 ·cited 24×
  Brant and Vance Hayward were convicted of knowingly receiving and concealing stolen automobile wheels and tires worth $100. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed their convictions, rejecting challenges to the validity of search warrants, the sufficiency of evidence of guilty knowled
• Ford v. State
  402 So. 3d 973· Fla.· 2025-02-07 ·cited 23×
  James D. Ford, sentenced to death for brutal 1997 murders of a couple and sexual assault of the wife, appeals the summary denial of his third successive postconviction motion filed shortly before his scheduled execution. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the denial, rejecting For
• In re Standard Jury Instructions IN Crim. Cases-Report 2011-01
  73 So. 3d 136· Fla.· 2011-09-08 ·cited 23×
  The Florida Supreme Court approved amendments to standard criminal jury instructions pertaining to fleeing a law enforcement officer and aggravation of a felony, with minor modifications to clarify that certain aggravating offenses must be personally committed by the defendant.
• United States v. Helmsley
  941 F.2d 71· 2d Cir.· 1991-07-30 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the defendant's Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination was not violated, even if her immunized testimony indirectly led to the investigation, because the prosecution was based on independent evidence and there was no official manipulation.
• Duckett v. State
  568 So. 2d 891· Fla.· 1990-09-06 ·cited 23×
  James Duckett, a police officer, was convicted of sexual battery and first-degree murder of an 11-year-old girl and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and death sentence, finding the circumstantial evidence sufficient to exclude all reasonable
• Thomas v. Leeke
  725 F.2d 246· 4th Cir.· 1984-01-12 ·cited 23×
  The trial court's jury instructions were constitutionally adequate, and the state's allocation of the burden of proving self-defense to the defendant does not violate due process.
• Zilka v. Estelle
  529 F.2d 388· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-25 ·cited 23×
  A conviction will not be set aside on a petition for writ of habeas corpus, even if prior counselless felony convictions were used for impeachment, if the error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Sindrich v. State
  322 So. 2d 589· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-12-03 ·cited 23×
  College students Mark Sindrich and Christopher Ken Takagi were convicted of possessing cannabis found in a locked truck cargo area they were hired to drive, despite having no key, knowledge of contents, or exclusive control. The appellate court reversed because the evidence faile
• United States v. Glover
  514 F.2d 390· 9th Cir.· 1975-03-11 ·cited 23×
  A registrant's conviction for failing to keep his local draft board advised of his address is improper if he furnished a suitable address where mail would reach him, even if he failed to update his home address.
• Warmington v. State
  149 So. 3d 648· Fla.· 2014-10-16 ·cited 22×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a prosecutor impermissibly shifted the burden of proof by eliciting testimony from a detective about the defendant's failure to produce exculpatory documents during a pretrial investigation, even though the testimony was historically accurate.
• McCLOUD v. State
  741 So. 2d 512· Fla. 5th DCA· 1999-01-08 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed a judgment and sentence, holding that the trial court, not the jury, is to determine factual predicates for scoring points on a scoresheet, including whether penetration occurred in a sexual battery case.
• United States v. Juby Deon Battle and Donald Shannon Bullard
  892 F.2d 992· 11th Cir.· 1990-01-08 ·cited 22×
  The court should affirm the district court's judgment of acquittal because the government failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.