Confrontation Clause

1,935 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,522 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Beltram
  388 F.2d 449· 2d Cir.· 1968-01-22 ·cited 22×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that indictments based on hearsay testimony are permissible and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction of appellant Colon.
• Kemp v. Gov't of Canal Zone
  167 F.2d 938· 5th Cir.· 1948-05-15 ·cited 22×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that while the jury instructions regarding extenuating circumstances were erroneous, the defendant waived his right to confrontation by not objecting, and the appellate court could modify the sentence.
• McDONALD v. Hudspeth
  129 F.2d 196· 10th Cir.· 1942-06-17 ·cited 22×·via Confrontation Of Witnesses
  The court held that the failure to perfect an appeal is not grounds for habeas corpus relief, and the sentence imposed was not excessive as each count charged a distinct offense.
• State v. Damion J. Shearod
  992 So. 2d 900· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-10-24 ·cited 21×
  Florida appeals a trial court's post-verdict judgment of acquittal in a second-degree murder case. The appellate court reverses, finding the state established a prima facie case sufficient to survive the motion for acquittal, though it acknowledges serious evidentiary weaknesses
• Happ v. Moore
  784 So. 2d 1091· Fla.· 2001-05-03 ·cited 21×
  William Frederick Happ, a death-sentenced inmate, petitioned for habeas corpus relief based on claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. The Florida Supreme Court denied all five claims, holding that appellate counsel's performance fell within the acceptable range an
• McLEAN v. State
  754 So. 2d 176· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-04-05 ·cited 21×·via Constitutional Right To Confrontation
  Daniel McLean was convicted of kidnapping and three counts of sexual battery for his role in a joint assault with Jason Rancourt. The Second District Court of Appeal reversed his conviction for kidnapping and all sexual battery convictions, finding insufficient evidence for kidna
• United States v. Sherrod
  964 F.2d 1501· 5th Cir.· 1992-06-23 ·cited 21×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences, holding that the destruction of evidence did not violate due process, the district court's drug quantity findings were not clearly erroneous, and the DEA had the authority to schedule P2P.
• United States v. Perkins
  937 F.2d 1397· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-01 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its evidentiary rulings, and while an instruction on change of appearance was improper, it constituted harmless error. Therefore, the conviction is affirmed.
• United States v. Johnson
  935 F.2d 47· 4th Cir.· 1991-06-05 ·cited 21×·via Right To Confrontation
  An ex parte presentence conference between a court and a probation officer is not a critical stage of sentencing proceedings, and thus does not violate the Sixth Amendment right to counsel or confrontation.
• United States v. Ervin Kindle
  925 F.2d 272· 8th Cir.· 1991-02-15 ·cited 21×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err by failing to inquire into a potential conflict of interest, that contact with sequestered witnesses was not prejudicial, and that other claims regarding confrontation clause rights, severance, evidence
• United States v. Martin
  897 F.2d 1368· 6th Cir.· 1990-03-01 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the admission of hearsay testimony regarding the defendant's prior criminal acts was improper and violated the Confrontation Clause, and that this error was not harmless.
• United States v. Jordan
  810 F.2d 262· D.C. Cir.· 1987-01-27 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction was supported by overwhelming evidence, and while a procedural error in sentencing enhancement required remand, the enhancement itself was permissible.
• United States v. Biagio Cirrincione and Tom Cirrincione
  780 F.2d 620· 7th Cir.· 1985-12-11 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the defendants knowingly and voluntarily waived their right to separate counsel and that no actual conflict of interest adversely affected their attorney's performance at trial.
• United States v. Prantil
  764 F.2d 548· 9th Cir.· 1985-03-29 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the defendant's motion to recuse the prosecutor, who was a material witness, and that the prosecutor's summation contained prejudicial misconduct. The court also held that the defendant's statements regarding an
• Proffitt v. Louie L. Wainwright
  756 F.2d 1500· 11th Cir.· 1985-03-26 ·cited 21×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the prior panel's opinion did not implicitly require resentencing by a jury, and the petitioner's claim regarding jury instructions on mitigating circumstances is barred by procedural default.
• United States v. White
  671 F.2d 1126· 8th Cir.· 1982-02-26 ·cited 21×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in limiting cross-examination, admitting personal tax returns, or in its jury instructions, and that the statute of limitations did not bar the charges.
• United States v. Hirst
  668 F.2d 1180· 11th Cir.· 1982-02-09 ·cited 21×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court did not err in limiting cross-examination, in its jury instructions, or in denying severance or a new trial, affirming the convictions.
• United States v. Webster Williams
  626 F.2d 697· 9th Cir.· 1980-08-28 ·cited 21×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the denial of the motion to strike the co-defendant's testimony was not reversible error, and that the identification procedures, search of the vehicle, and supplemental jury instruction were proper.
• United States v. Goldstein
  532 F.2d 1305· 9th Cir.· 1976-03-25 ·cited 21×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The court held that the telephone company's investigation and subsequent search warrant were lawful, and the evidence obtained was admissible.
• United States ex rel. Ronald James Dessus v. Commonwealth of Pa.
  452 F.2d 557· 3d Cir.· 1971-11-29 ·cited 21×
  Federal courts lack habeas corpus jurisdiction for a petitioner not in custody, and the denial of funds for a defense psychologist was within the trial court's discretion.
• United States v. Ahmed
  73 F.4th 1363· 11th Cir.· 2023-07-13 ·cited 20×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant's constitutional rights were not violated by the district court's rulings regarding COVID-19 concerns, evidentiary matters, or prosecutorial conduct.
• Tarleton v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
  5 F.4th 1278· 11th Cir.· 2021-07-23 ·cited 20×
  Marvin Tarleton was convicted of armed bank robbery in Florida based on identification evidence from family members and a bank teller, though DNA and fingerprint evidence excluded him as a contributor. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of his federal habeas petition for in
• Andres v. State
  254 So. 3d 283· Fla.· 2018-09-20 ·cited 20×
  Rafael Andres was convicted of first-degree murder and other felonies in the 2005 death of Ivette Farinas. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction for first-degree murder but vacated his death sentence because the jury's non-unanimous 9-3 recommendation violated the Six
• Ivana Linic v. State
  80 So. 3d 382· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-02-08 ·cited 20×·via Right To Confrontation
  Ivana Linic was convicted of culpable negligence child neglect causing serious bodily injury after her premature infant son died of malnutrition and dehydration. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding multiple evidentiary errors and imp
• Sproule v. State
  927 So. 2d 46· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-03-29 ·cited 20×
  Gary Sproule was convicted of Habitual Driving While License Revoked and challenged the admission of his driving record as hearsay and a violation of his Sixth Amendment confrontation rights under Crawford v. Washington. The Florida appellate court affirmed the conviction, holdin
• Barows v. State
  805 So. 2d 120· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-01-23 ·cited 20×·via Right To Confrontation
  David Barows was convicted of robbery and appealed, challenging the trial court's exclusion of evidence regarding a potential civil forfeiture action against the victim's property. The court held that the trial judge abused its discretion by preventing cross-examination on this i
• King v. State
  642 So. 2d 649· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-09-16 ·cited 20×
  Walter C. King appeals his conviction for capital sexual battery against an eight-year-old. The Florida appellate court found reversible error in the trial judge's denial of a jury instruction on the lesser included offense of lewd and lascivious assault until after closing argum
• United States v. Curry
  977 F.2d 1042· 7th Cir.· 1992-09-24 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the joinder of perjury counts with conspiracy counts was proper under Rule 8(b) and that the exclusion of expert testimony on eyewitness identification was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Tardiff
  969 F.2d 1283· 1st Cir.· 1992-07-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a defendant waives the right to complain about lack of an evidentiary hearing or continuance if not requested, and the Confrontation Clause does not typically apply at sentencing.
• United States v. Dischner
  974 F.2d 1502· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-03 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the RICO statute and Alaska's commercial bribe receiving statute were not unconstitutionally vague as applied to the defendants' conduct. The court also found no abuse of discretion in proceeding with an eleven-person jury and no i
• United States v. Brooks
  957 F.2d 1138· 4th Cir.· 1992-02-28 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy to distribute cocaine, but vacated one defendant's sentence for obstruction of justice and remanded for resentencing.
• British Robinson v. State
  575 So. 2d 699· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-02-06 ·cited 20×·via Right To Confrontation
  British Robinson appeals his convictions for sexual battery and aggravated assault, challenging the trial court's application of Florida's Rape Shield Law to exclude evidence of the victim's reputation as a prostitute. The court affirmed the convictions, holding that while such e
• United States v. Wise
  923 F.2d 86· 8th Cir.· 1991-01-08 ·cited 20×
• United States v. Cammisano
  917 F.2d 1057· 8th Cir.· 1990-10-24 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the conviction for obstruction of justice but vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing due to insufficient corroboration of hearsay evidence used for upward departure and lack of specific findings regarding the fine.
• United States v. Renard Barone
  913 F.2d 46· 2d Cir.· 1990-08-31 ·cited 20×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that a defendant's status as a prominent public office holder is not per se impermissible to consider for an upward departure from Sentencing Guidelines.
• United States v. Notrangelo
  909 F.2d 363· 9th Cir.· 1990-07-18 ·cited 20×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the district court did not err in relying on co-defendants' trial testimony for sentencing adjustments, but did err in departing upward based on prior convictions without analyzing their similarity to the offense of conviction.
• Francis v. Coughlin
  891 F.2d 43· 2d Cir.· 1989-12-04 ·cited 20×·via Right To Confront Evidence
  The court held that an inmate has a clearly established constitutional right to a hearing before an unbiased officer and to be informed of and comment on adverse evidence, but not a right to be present during the testimony of witnesses.
• Nelson v. Farrey
  874 F.2d 1222· 7th Cir.· 1989-05-17 ·cited 20×
  The admission of T's statements to Dr. McLean did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights because the prosecution demonstrated T's unavailability and the statements' particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.
• Sampson v. State
  541 So. 2d 733· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-04-07 ·cited 20×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that prior similar acts evidence was properly admitted, a victim's testimony via closed-circuit television was appropriate, and the admission of certain out-of-court statements did not require reversal.
• United States v. Chapman
  866 F.2d 1326· 11th Cir.· 1989-03-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the admission of the defendant's wife's out-of-court statements did not violate his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation or hearsay rules, and that the assertion of marital privilege did not render the statements inadmissible. The court also found no reversi
• United States v. Hayes
  861 F.2d 1225· 10th Cir.· 1988-11-23 ·cited 20×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that computer data compilations of tax records, properly authenticated and kept in the ordinary course of business, are admissible under Fed.R.Evid. 803(6) even if the IRS is considered law enforcement, provided the authoring employee testifies. The court also held
• United States v. Buford L. Peak & Bennie L. Peak
  856 F.2d 825· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-29 ·cited 20×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The exclusion of hearsay evidence regarding Bennie Peak's state of mind was harmless error and did not affect substantial rights.
• United States v. Kusek
  844 F.2d 942· 2d Cir.· 1988-04-06 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the admission of wiretap tapes despite a delay in sealing, the exclusion of handwriting exemplars, the establishment of venue, the admission of a spontaneous oral statement, expert testimony on drug jargon, the use of a suppressed t
• United States v. Williams
  837 F.2d 1009· 11th Cir.· 1988-02-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the admission of 'yellow sheets' was proper as a party admission, and the restriction on cross-examination did not violate the Confrontation Clause.
• United States v. Unruh
  855 F.2d 1363· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-03 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the jury instruction on intent to injure or defraud was potentially misleading, and that the failure to instruct on the defense of board consent or good faith constituted reversible error for certain counts, requiring remand.
• United States v. Bayard Spector
  793 F.2d 932· 8th Cir.· 1986-06-16 ·cited 20×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court should reverse the conviction because the government's contingent agreement with a witness violated due process and the denial of access to the witness's taped diaries improperly restricted cross-examination.
• United States v. Griffin
  778 F.2d 707· 11th Cir.· 1985-12-19 ·cited 20×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that admitting evidence of a coconspirator's absence from trial and adjudication of guilt was improper and unfairly prejudicial.
• United States v. Metzger
  778 F.2d 1195· 6th Cir.· 1985-12-13 ·cited 20×
  The court held that evidence seized from the demolished vehicle was admissible, the indictment was sufficient, and certain documents were admissible under hearsay exceptions. However, the court reversed convictions related to the use of an unregistered firearm and making a destru
• United States v. Whitman
  771 F.2d 1348· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-20 ·cited 20×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The court held that the district court committed reversible error by improperly precluding the appellant from presenting evidence to rebut the government's motive evidence regarding Jack Catain.
• Charles "Red" Warden v. Wyrick
  770 F.2d 112· 8th Cir.· 1985-08-09 ·cited 20×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas corpus petition, affirming the denial of relief.