Character Evidence

704 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 170 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Canas
  595 F.2d 73· 1st Cir.· 1979-04-05 ·cited 13×·via Cross-Examination Of Character Witnesses
  The court held that prosecutorial misconduct, duplicity in the indictment, and jury instructions did not warrant reversal of the convictions.
• United States v. James
  208 F.2d 124· 2d Cir.· 1953-11-04 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding a prior arrest was prejudicial error and not harmless.
• D.M. v. State
  714 So. 2d 1117· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-07-15 ·cited 12×
  D.M., a juvenile, was adjudicated delinquent for sale of cocaine and possession of cocaine with intent to sell based on surveillance of hand-to-hand drug transactions. The appellate court affirmed the sale conviction but reversed the possession conviction, holding that aiding and
• THE Florida BAR v. Smith
  650 So. 2d 980· Fla.· 1995-02-23 ·cited 12×·via Character Or Reputation
  The Florida Bar disciplined attorney Lawrence J. Smith for tax evasion and making a false statement to the Federal Election Commission, felonies to which he pleaded guilty. The Florida Supreme Court approved the referee's findings of guilt under Rule 4-8.4(a) but imposed a three-
• Burgess v. State
  644 So. 2d 589· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-11-02 ·cited 12×
  Defendant was convicted of sexual battery, and the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and ordered a new trial based on an accumulation of three trial errors: improper admission of hearsay details under the first complaint exception, improper character evidence to bolster th
• Smart v. State
  596 So. 2d 786· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-04-07 ·cited 12×
  Freddie Lee Smart was convicted of resisting arrest without violence, but the Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District, reversed his conviction and remanded for a new trial due to prosecutorial and testimonial misconduct regarding his prior contacts with the arresting off
• United States v. Rogers
  918 F.2d 207· D.C. Cir.· 1990-11-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that evidence of prior drug distribution and beeper possession was admissible under Federal Rules of Evidence 404(b) and 403, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict for drug distribution within a school zone.
• Jefferson v. State
  560 So. 2d 1374· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-05-10 ·cited 12×
  Florida appellate court affirmed cocaine sale conviction, holding that a confidential informant's testimony identifying the location as a high-crime area was not sufficiently prejudicial to warrant mistrial.
• Tyler v. White
  811 F.2d 1204· 8th Cir.· 1987-02-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while defense counsel's argument regarding plaintiffs' failure to call certain defendants as witnesses was improper, it did not constitute reversible error given the overall evidence and the nature of the error.
• United States v. Moosey
  735 F.2d 633· 1st Cir.· 1984-06-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that evidence of prior cocaine deliveries was admissible for the conspiracy count with a limiting instruction, and that coconspirator statements were properly admitted under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(E).
• United States v. Wilford
  710 F.2d 439· 8th Cir.· 1983-06-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendants' actions constituted extortion under the Hobbs Act, that their felony and misdemeanor charges were not duplicative, and that various evidentiary rulings were not abuses of discretion.
• United States v. McCOLLOM
  664 F.2d 56· 5th Cir.· 1981-12-14 ·cited 12×·via Cross-Examination Of Character Witnesses
  The court held that the defendant's claims of trial error and prosecutorial misconduct were without merit, and affirmed the denial of his motion to vacate his sentence.
• Cohn v. Papke
  655 F.2d 191· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-31 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the admission of evidence regarding the plaintiff's prior sexual experiences and preferences was reversible error because it was irrelevant, impermissible character evidence, and unduly prejudicial.
• United States v. Phillips
  599 F.2d 134· 6th Cir.· 1979-05-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that admitting testimony about the defendant's participation in other bank robberies was inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) because it was offered to prove criminal disposition rather than a specific exception like plan or identity, and its admissio
• United States v. Tempesta
  587 F.2d 931· 8th Cir.· 1978-12-05 ·cited 12×·via Cross-Examination Of Character Witnesses
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for filing false tax returns was supported by sufficient evidence and that various trial and post-trial rulings, including those concerning preindictment delay, admissibility of evidence, and jury instructions, did not constitute rev
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Petersen
  553 F.2d 324· 3d Cir.· 1977-04-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the eyewitness identification procedures, though suggestive, did not create a substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification, and that proffered testimony regarding the defendant's religious beliefs as evidence of nonviolence was not legally relevant.
• Walker v. United States
  490 F.2d 683· 8th Cir.· 1974-01-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that admitting a pistol found on the defendant, which witnesses positively identified as not being the weapon used in the robbery, was prejudicial error requiring reversal.
• Kilgore v. United States
  467 F.2d 22· 5th Cir.· 1972-09-25 ·cited 12×·via Cross-Examination Of Character Witnesses
  The court held that while the government could generally cross-examine character witnesses about community awareness of a taxpayer's alleged misconduct, the specific questions proffered were improper hypothetical questions and thus properly excluded by the district court.
• Loeb v. Laurence Hammond and Kirkpatrick W. Dilling
  407 F.2d 779· 7th Cir.· 1969-02-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a directed verdict for one defendant was proper due to lack of evidence of fraud, but a new trial was required for the other defendant due to improper admission of character evidence.
• Wilcox v. United States
  387 F.2d 60· 5th Cir.· 1967-12-11 ·cited 12×·via Cross-Examination Of Character Witnesses
  The court held that the district court committed plain error by permitting the cross-examination of character witnesses regarding the defendant's prior arrests, as this violated the standard set in Michelson v. United States and prejudiced the defendant.
• United States v. King
  378 F.2d 359· 6th Cir.· 1967-06-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that improper questioning by the district attorney regarding prior arrests and unrelated offenses constituted plain error, requiring reversal of convictions.
• Caughman v. The Wash. Terminal Co.
  345 F.2d 434· D.C. Cir.· 1965-03-04 ·cited 12×
  The court reversed the judgment, finding that the trial judge's exclusion of certain evidence was potentially erroneous and that the admissibility of other evidence, including motion pictures and character evidence, should be left to the trial court's discretion.
• United States v. Baysek
  212 F.2d 446· 3d Cir.· 1954-05-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in limiting the number of character witnesses, in instructing the jury on character testimony, or in refusing to withdraw a juror due to prosecutor's remarks.
• Bartoli v. United States
  192 F.2d 130· 4th Cir.· 1951-11-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant's actions, including selling counterfeit money and demonstrating its use and preparation, established his participation in a conspiracy to sell counterfeit money.
• Peoples Loan & Inv. Co. v. Travelers Ins. Co.
  151 F.2d 437· 8th Cir.· 1945-10-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the insured's death was not accidental as a matter of law, and the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of the insured's prior hostility towards the police.
• United States v. Gruber
  123 F.2d 307· 2d Cir.· 1941-11-10 ·cited 12×·via Cross-Examination Of Character Witnesses
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for conspiracy and aiding and abetting wiretapping, and that the trial court's rulings on evidence and cross-examination were not prejudicial.
• Winter v. United States
  13 F.2d 53· 8th Cir.· 1926-04-12 ·cited 12×
  The judgment of conviction for violating the National Motor Vehicle Theft Act is affirmed. The court found that the trial court's refusal of certain jury instructions regarding the defendant's knowledge of the stolen nature of the vehicle, the effect of a reasonable explanation b
• Porter v. Ferguson
  4 Fla. 102· Fla.· 1851-01-01 ·cited 12×
  In this early Florida case, the Supreme Court reversed a judgment in a factor (agent) liability dispute because the trial court instructed the jury on an issue not raised by the pleadings—whether the factor failed to insure goods—rather than the actual issue of whether a specific
• E.M. v. State
  61 So. 3d 1255· Fla. 3d DCA· 2011-05-25 ·cited 11×
  E.M., a juvenile, was adjudicated delinquent for possession of marijuana based on a police officer's observation of a marijuana cigarette falling from his hand. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed because the trial court admitted improper evidence characterizing the arr
• THE Florida BAR v. Varner
  992 So. 2d 224· Fla.· 2008-09-25 ·cited 11×·via Character Or Reputation
  The Florida Bar disciplined attorney Dewey Homer Varner Jr. for professional misconduct including filing a notice of voluntary dismissal without client authorization, failing to communicate with his client, and testifying falsely before the referee. The Court rejected the referee
• Henderson v. State
  919 So. 2d 652· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-01-26 ·cited 11×·via Admissibility Of Character Evidence
  Henderson appealed the denial of his motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, challenging the trial court's refusal to appoint counsel for his evidentiary hearing. The appellate court reversed as to claim three (ineffective assistance for f
• Ruland v. State
  614 So. 2d 537· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-01-19 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court made no reversible errors regarding evidentiary rulings, jury selection, or sentencing.
• United States v. Dring
  930 F.2d 687· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-04 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court did not err in barring character evidence, allowing in-court identifications, or denying dismissal due to the deportation of alien witnesses.
• Leverett v. Spears
  877 F.2d 921· 11th Cir.· 1989-07-19 ·cited 11×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional error in the jury instructions, hearsay admission, or character evidence presented at trial.
• United States v. Forsythe
  594 F.2d 947· 3d Cir.· 1979-02-15 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of uncharged crimes in rebuttal to character evidence was prejudicial error, requiring reversal of the convictions.
• United States v. Dalton
  465 F.2d 32· 5th Cir.· 1972-07-14 ·cited 11×
• Pitts v. State
  263 So. 3d 834· Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-02-05 ·cited 10×
  Samuel Pitts appealed his sexual battery conviction challenging the trial court's admission of collateral crime evidence and exclusion of good character evidence. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, holding that the collateral crime evidence was properly a
• Alton Roosevelt v. State
  42 So. 3d 293· Fla. 3d DCA· 2010-08-04 ·cited 10×
  Alton Roosevelt appeals his adjudication as a sexually violent predator under Florida's Jimmy Ryce Act, challenging the trial court's admission of impeachment evidence against the defense expert witness Dr. Natalie Brown. The court reverses and remands for a new trial, finding th
• Alcantar v. State
  987 So. 2d 822· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-08-15 ·cited 10×·via Improper Character Evidence
  Armando Alcantar appeals his trafficking in cocaine conviction and five-year sentence. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial because the trial court improperly admitted hearsay and prejudicial character evidence that buttressed a weak eyewitness identification
• Marchina v. State
  702 So. 2d 1369· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-12-30 ·cited 10×
  James Marchina was convicted of sexual battery on a young boy, but the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed because the prosecution improperly elicited testimony about other pending charges involving "little girls," which was inflammatory character evidence that violated the
• Collier v. State
  681 So. 2d 856· Fla. 5th DCA· 1996-10-18 ·cited 10×
  Leroy Collier was convicted of aggravated battery and attempted false imprisonment after stabbing his girlfriend and chasing her into a tavern. On appeal, he challenged the trial court's admission of a statement about his prior incarceration and cross-examination regarding a rece
• Carpenter v. State
  664 So. 2d 1167· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-12-27 ·cited 10×·via Cross-Examination Of Character Witnesses
  Carpenter was charged with second-degree murder after shooting and killing Brian Soini. While claiming self-defense, the prosecutor asked Carpenter whether he had told another person that he shot Soini because he was "sick and tired of the crap." Carpenter denied it, and the pros
• Abbott v. State
  622 So. 2d 601· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-08-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a police officer's statement implying the defendant was a "larger scale drug dealer" was a violation of the Williams rule and warranted reversal.
• Wilkins v. State
  607 So. 2d 500· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-11-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court committed reversible error by denying a challenge for cause to a prospective juror and by admitting inadmissible evidence and argument attacking the defendant's character.
• United States v. Arias-Montoya
  967 F.2d 708· 1st Cir.· 1992-06-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of a defendant's prior drug conviction was permissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) to establish knowledge, even if propensity was a factor in the inference.
• United States v. Boone
  951 F.2d 1526· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Dehlia Boone did not waive her right to appeal the discrepancy between the oral and written verdicts, and affirmed her conviction based on the written verdict. The court reversed Roger Swayze's perjury conviction on one count due to the literal truth of his an
• United States v. James B. Frost (89-5144/5145) & Charles L. Griffin (89-5146/5147)
  914 F.2d 756· 6th Cir.· 1990-09-13 ·cited 10×·via Cross-Examination Of Character Witnesses
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendants' convictions for conspiracy, bribery, and misapplication of bank funds, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its rulings.
• Gonzalez v. State
  559 So. 2d 748· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-04-24 ·cited 10×
  Andre Gonzalez was convicted of manslaughter with a firearm and unlawful possession of a firearm. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial court committed reversible error by allowing cross-examination about Gonzalez's prior school discipl
• United States v. Miller
  883 F.2d 1540· 11th Cir.· 1989-09-25 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting extrinsic evidence of a prior drug sale to show identity, modus operandi, or intent, and alternatively, that any error was harmless.
• Lesko v. Owens
  881 F.2d 44· 3d Cir.· 1989-07-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of gruesome details of a prior murder was unduly prejudicial and violated the defendant's right to a fair trial. Additionally, the court found that a potential plea agreement violation raised serious due process concerns.