Bruton Rule

577 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Warren
  578 F.2d 1058· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-24 ·cited 242×
  The Coast Guard has broad authority under 14 U.S.C. § 89(a) to board and search American vessels on the high seas without probable cause, and the participation of other federal agents does not invalidate such actions.
• United States v. Sperling
  506 F.2d 1323· 2d Cir.· 1974-10-10 ·cited 231×
  The court held that the government's failure to produce a key witness's letter, required under the Jencks Act, was prejudicial for some defendants, requiring a new trial on conspiracy charges, but not for others due to overwhelming independent evidence.
• United States v. Satterfield
  743 F.2d 827· 11th Cir.· 1984-10-03 ·cited 181×
  The court held that the restitution provisions of the Victim and Witness Protection Act of 1982 are constitutional and do not violate the seventh, fifth, or fourteenth amendments.
• United States v. Phyliss Briscoe
  896 F.2d 1476· 7th Cir.· 1990-02-26 ·cited 164×
  The admission of a co-defendant's statement, even if it implicates the defendant, does not violate the Confrontation Clause if the violation is harmless error.
• United States v. Enrico Campanale and Donald Matthews
  518 F.2d 352· 9th Cir.· 1975-06-04 ·cited 160×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to support the convictions for the Count 2 conspiracy, reversing those convictions. All other convictions were affirmed.
• Ervin McCRAY v. State
  416 So. 2d 804· Fla.· 1982-06-24 ·cited 150×
  Ervin McCray was convicted of first-degree murder for shooting a gun store manager during a robbery attempt. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but reversed the death sentence imposed by the trial judge, reducing it to life imprisonment in accordance with the jury'
• Posey v. United States
  416 F.2d 545· 5th Cir.· 1969-07-17 ·cited 144×
• United States v. Scholle
  553 F.2d 1109· 8th Cir.· 1977-04-12 ·cited 142×
  The court held that the admission of co-conspirator statements was proper because substantial independent evidence showed a likelihood of illicit association, and that the admission of prior consistent statements and evidence of prior bad acts was permissible under the Federal Ru
• United States v. Kirk
  534 F.2d 1262· 8th Cir.· 1976-04-22 ·cited 134×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for a single conspiracy and that the trial court did not err in admitting recorded conversations or denying severance motions.
• United States v. Wilson
  500 F.2d 715· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-18 ·cited 132×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no merit in the appellants' arguments regarding statutory vagueness, severance, admission of evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, or insufficiency of evidence.
• United States v. Knuckles
  581 F.2d 305· 2d Cir.· 1978-06-30 ·cited 114×
  The court held that defendants could not raise the issue of insufficient evidence of cocaine on appeal after they had argued for a variance based on the presence of cocaine evidence at trial. The court also found the admission of a co-defendant's statement and recordings of conve
• United States v. Irie E. Leonard
  494 F.2d 955· D.C. Cir.· 1974-01-31 ·cited 109×
  The court held that the district court committed reversible error by refusing to instruct the jury to scrutinize the testimony of witnesses granted immunity and by limiting cross-examination regarding pending felony charges against a witness. It also held that the failure to prov
• United States v. Davis
  487 F.2d 112· 5th Cir.· 1973-10-16 ·cited 109×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no prejudicial error in the trial proceedings regarding speedy trial rights, evidence admission, co-conspirator testimony, photographic displays, or evidentiary rulings.
• United States v. Brooklier
  685 F.2d 1208· 9th Cir.· 1982-09-03 ·cited 106×
  The court affirmed convictions for RICO and Hobbs Act violations, holding that double jeopardy, vindictive prosecution, and evidentiary challenges did not warrant reversal.
• Looney v. State
  803 So. 2d 656· Fla.· 2001-11-01 ·cited 101×
  Jason Looney was convicted of two first-degree murders and sentenced to death for his participation in a robbery, burglary, arson, and execution-style killing of two victims in Wakulla County, Florida. On appeal, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and death senten
• Roberts v. United States
  416 F.2d 1216· 5th Cir.· 1969-10-09 ·cited 100×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Barbara Bookout's conviction for conspiracy and aiding/abetting the passing of counterfeit currency, but affirmed the convictions of Carl Roberts and John Coceo.
• United States v. Lyon
  397 F.2d 505· 7th Cir.· 1968-06-27 ·cited 98×
  The court should have reversed and remanded the conviction of appellant Lysczyk due to a defective search warrant affidavit.
• Neary v. State
  384 So. 2d 881· Fla.· 1980-05-15 ·cited 94×
  The search of Neary's bedroom and seizure of the blue shirt with missing buttons was reasonable and did not violate the Fourth Amendment, as the officers lawfully entered the bedroom with Neary's consent and the search warrant was supported by probable cause independent of any qu
• United States v. DiGILIO
  538 F.2d 972· 3d Cir.· 1976-06-07 ·cited 93×
  The court's panel opinion erred in rejecting the aggregation of values for multiple takings of FBI files, as the jury could have found a single criminal plan.
• United States v. Madison
  689 F.2d 1300· 7th Cir.· 1982-09-28 ·cited 92×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying Best's motion to sever, denying Best's motion to suppress his confession, or in admitting Best's confession, and that Madison's Sixth Amendment rights were not violated by the admission of Best's statement.
• United States v. Augustus Charles Bobo
  586 F.2d 355· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-30 ·cited 92×
  A defendant's consent to a mistrial, given through counsel, bars a subsequent double jeopardy claim, even if the mistrial was declared due to defense counsel's error and the defendant did not personally waive the right on the record.
• United States v. Weinrich
  586 F.2d 481· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-15 ·cited 91×
  The court held that the wiretap application was supported by sufficient probable cause and the information was not stale, and that the searches of the vessels were lawful due to probable cause and exigent circumstances.
• United States v. Severo D. Espinosa
  771 F.2d 1382· 10th Cir.· 1985-08-26 ·cited 90×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the convictions for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute, and that the trial court did not err in denying severance or mistrial based on co-defendant's opening statement.
• United States v. Guillette
  547 F.2d 743· 2d Cir.· 1976-12-20 ·cited 90×
  The court held that the trial court properly instructed the jury on proximate cause in relation to the "if death results" provision of 18 U.S.C. § 241, and that the refusal to give a specific alibi instruction was not reversible error.
• United States v. Lemonakis
  485 F.2d 941· D.C. Cir.· 1973-06-29 ·cited 89×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that recordings of consensual electronic surveillance were admissible, even when the informant was unavailable for cross-examination, and that the right to counsel did not attach to pre-indictment surveillance.
• Glock v. Moore
  776 So. 2d 243· Fla.· 2001-01-05 ·cited 88×
  Robert Glock, a death row inmate scheduled for execution, appealed the denial of his successive motion for postconviction relief and filed a habeas corpus petition challenging his 1983 murder conviction and death sentence. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's deni
• United States v. Brady
  579 F.2d 1121· 9th Cir.· 1978-06-20 ·cited 88×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings of causation and intent, that the consolidation and denial of severance were not prejudicial, that the Bruton rule did not apply, and that the jury selection plan was not
• United States v. Armedo-Sarmiento
  545 F.2d 785· 2d Cir.· 1976-10-28 ·cited 86×
  The court held that the jury could reasonably find a single conspiracy existed, that speedy trial rights were not violated, and that certain evidence was obtained through an illegal search and seizure requiring reversal for two appellants.
• United States v. Taylor
  716 F.2d 701· 9th Cir.· 1983-09-23 ·cited 81×
  A defendant cannot be punished for both attempt and conspiracy under 21 U.S.C. § 846 for a single course of conduct, even if elements of both are present.
• United States v. Walton
  552 F.2d 1354· 10th Cir.· 1977-03-14 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for severance, nor did it commit plain error regarding comments on the defendants' failure to testify or limitations on cross-examination.
• United States v. DeBERRY
  487 F.2d 448· 2d Cir.· 1973-11-07 ·cited 80×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the conviction, arguing that the trial court properly handled the potential conflict of interest arising from joint representation by questioning the defendants and counsel.
• United States v. Otto Archbold-Newball
  554 F.2d 665· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-22 ·cited 79×
  The court held that statements made by the appellants to an undercover agent in Martinique were admissible as co-conspirator hearsay and did not violate their Fifth or Sixth Amendment rights because they were not in custody for Miranda purposes and the right to counsel had not ye
• United States v. Garrett
  727 F.2d 1003· 11th Cir.· 1984-03-02 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the disqualification of retained counsel was permissible under the Sixth Amendment, double jeopardy did not bar prosecution for continuing criminal enterprise after a conviction for a predicate offense, and the restriction of cross-examination was proper. Howe
• Victorino v. State
  23 So. 3d 87· Fla.· 2009-11-25 ·cited 76×
  Troy Victorino was convicted of six counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for four of those murders in connection with a brutal home invasion and killing spree in August 2004. The Florida Supreme Court upheld his convictions and death sentences, rejecting constitut
• United States v. Kelley
  526 F.2d 615· 8th Cir.· 1975-11-26 ·cited 76×
  The court held that extrajudicial statements made in furtherance of a conspiracy are admissible if independent evidence establishes concert of action, and that the admission of such statements does not violate the Confrontation Clause if they bear traditional indicia of reliabili
• United States v. Wingate
  520 F.2d 309· 2d Cir.· 1975-08-04 ·cited 76×
  A co-defendant's statement inculpating another may be admitted if, viewed with other evidence, it clearly implicates the co-defendant, even if not by name.
• United States v. Beale
  921 F.2d 1412· 11th Cir.· 1991-01-28 ·cited 75×
  The court held that the admission of Roberts' statement violated Bruton, requiring a new trial for Gilbert, but affirmed other convictions and evidentiary rulings.
• United States v. Parnell
  581 F.2d 1374· 10th Cir.· 1978-07-24 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for aiding and abetting the interstate transportation of falsely made and forged securities and conspiracy, and that there was no fatal variance between the indictment and the proof, nor error in the denia
• United States v. Espinoza-Seanez
  862 F.2d 526· 5th Cir.· 1988-12-15 ·cited 72×
  The court held that a rational jury could find sufficient evidence to establish the required intent for conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Bennett
  848 F.2d 1134· 11th Cir.· 1988-07-07 ·cited 72×
  The court held that the admission of William Bennett's prior drug smuggling convictions was proper under Rule 404(b) and Rule 403, and that the use of a single interpreter for multiple Spanish-speaking defendants did not violate their statutory or constitutional rights. The court
• United States v. Schroeder
  433 F.2d 846· 8th Cir.· 1970-10-07 ·cited 72×
  The court held that admitting testimony about a conversation, even if erroneous, was harmless error given the witness's lack of clear recollection and the jury instruction to disregard it; and that severance was not required as evidence was admissible against defendants in a join
• United States v. Julita De Parias
  805 F.2d 1447· 11th Cir.· 1986-12-15 ·cited 71×
  The court held that federal jurisdiction existed under the Hobbs Act, and that limitations on cross-examination, admission of photographs, evidence of flight, co-defendant statements, and compelled hair samples were not reversible error.
• United States v. Swanson
  572 F.2d 523· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-05 ·cited 71×
  A criminal defendant's claim of amnesia, without more, is insufficient to establish incompetence to stand trial under 18 U.S.C. § 4244.
• United States v. Wilkinson
  754 F.2d 1427· 2d Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 70×
  The court affirmed convictions for drug offenses, finding sufficient evidence for continuing criminal enterprise, admissible prior consistent statements, and proper denial of multiple conspiracy charges and wiretap necessity.
• United States v. Tille
  729 F.2d 615· 9th Cir.· 1984-03-29 ·cited 70×
  The court held that proof of an agreement to commit a substantive RICO violation is sufficient for a conspiracy conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d), and that coconspirator statements made during the conspiracy's concealment efforts are admissible.
• United States v. Singer
  660 F.2d 1295· 8th Cir.· 1981-10-05 ·cited 70×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that while the admission of a ten-year-old prior conviction was an abuse of discretion, it was harmless error, and that the denial of motions for acquittal and severance was proper.
• United States v. Fleming
  594 F.2d 598· 7th Cir.· 1979-02-13 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the admission of interlocking confessions from co-defendants was not a Bruton violation, and any error was harmless given the overwhelming evidence. However, for one defendant, the admission of co-defendants' confessions was prejudicial and warranted a new tri
• United States v. Jenkins
  496 F.2d 57· 2d Cir.· 1974-04-05 ·cited 70×
  The court affirmed convictions for Jenkins, Hall, and Wilcox, finding sufficient evidence and no abuse of discretion in denying severance. The conviction for Morrow was remanded for correction of sentencing form.
• United States v. Rubin
  609 F.2d 51· 2d Cir.· 1979-09-06 ·cited 69×
  The limitations in Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) apply only to the use of prior consistent statements as affirmative evidence, not when they are used solely for rehabilitation.
• Damon v. State
  397 So. 2d 1224· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-05-12 ·cited 68×
  Damon and Ladler were convicted of third-degree murder and burglary arising from the brutal 1976 murder of Wiley Swiney, where both defendants confessed to their respective roles. The defendants appealed challenging the joint trial, the admissibility of each other's confessions,