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

• Collins v. Buchkoe
  493 F.2d 343· 6th Cir.· 1974-03-27 ·cited 18×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that while sentencing judges may consider unsworn information, due process requires an opportunity to rebut materially false information relied upon for sentencing.
• Glinsey v. Parker
  491 F.2d 337· 6th Cir.· 1974-02-13 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the admission of co-defendants' confessions, even with limiting instructions, violated the confrontation clause unless the statements were adopted by the defendant or the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Silence in custody does not constitute adop
• United States v. William "Buddy" Lester
  491 F.2d 680· 6th Cir.· 1974-02-11 ·cited 18×
  The court held that when prior inconsistent statements are admitted without objection, they are considered for their natural probative effect, including as substantive evidence.
• Pizzo v. State
  289 So. 2d 26· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-01-30 ·cited 18×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the admission of fingerprint evidence was proper, despite the State's failure to produce it prior to trial, because the defendant suffered no prejudice.
• United States v. Dority
  487 F.2d 846· 6th Cir.· 1973-12-04 ·cited 18×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the FBI agent did not violate appellant's constitutional rights by questioning him without his state-appointed counsel present, and any potential Bruton violation was harmless error.
• United States v. Small
  443 F.2d 497· 3d Cir.· 1971-05-20 ·cited 18×
  The admission of a witness's prior inconsistent statement as substantive evidence, after the witness repudiated it at trial and was available for cross-examination, constituted reversible error.
• United States v. Smalls
  438 F.2d 711· 2d Cir.· 1971-02-22 ·cited 18×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the defendant was not denied his right to a speedy trial and affirmed his conviction.
• Metropolis v. Turner
  437 F.2d 207· 10th Cir.· 1971-01-27 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting the writ of habeas corpus and discharging the petitioners because the Bruton rule was either inapplicable or the violation was harmless error.
• Weldon Burris v. United States
  430 F.2d 399· 7th Cir.· 1970-07-27 ·cited 18×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the district court did not err in summarily denying the petitioner's motion to vacate his sentence, as the allegations were either contradicted by the record, resolvable by the judge's personal knowledge, or lacked sufficient specificity to warrant an evidenti
• United States ex rel. Robert James Long v. Pate
  418 F.2d 1028· 7th Cir.· 1970-01-08 ·cited 18×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the district court properly denied the appellant's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, affirming the denial of relief for both the 1953 and 1963 convictions.
• The Reverend Henry Hale Bucher, Jr. v. Selective Serv. Sys.
  421 F.2d 24· 3d Cir.· 1970-01-02 ·cited 18×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that pre-induction judicial review of draft reclassifications is generally barred by statute, except in cases where a registrant is denied a statutory exemption or faces punishment without due process.
• Buie v. United States
  420 F.2d 1207· 5th Cir.· 1969-12-23 ·cited 18×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the appellant's conviction for mail and securities fraud was supported by sufficient evidence and that no reversible error occurred during the trial.
• Davis v. Sigler
  415 F.2d 1159· 8th Cir.· 1969-09-16 ·cited 18×
  The admission of codefendants' confessions in a joint trial, even with limiting instructions, violates the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation when the confessions powerfully incriminate the defendant.
• West v. Henderson
  409 F.2d 95· 6th Cir.· 1969-04-07 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the prosecutor's use of a co-defendant's confession, despite cautionary instructions, violated the appellant's due process rights by denying him a fair trial.
• Thompson v. United States
  403 F.2d 209· 5th Cir.· 1968-11-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting reputation testimony, denying a mistrial, denying acquittal, or in its ruling on the constitutionality of the statute.
• Ennis v. State
  95 So. 2d 20· Fla.· 1957-03-27 ·cited 18×·via Right To Confrontation
  Carlos Ennis was convicted of issuing a worthless check in violation of Florida Statute § 832.05. On appeal, he challenged the constitutionality of the statute, claiming it violated his right to confront witnesses and amounted to unconstitutional imprisonment for debt. The Florid
• Hyun v. Landon
  219 F.2d 404· 9th Cir.· 1955-01-31 ·cited 18×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the appellant was not denied due process during deportation proceedings, and the deportation order was supported by substantial evidence.
• United States v. Nugent
  200 F.2d 46· 2d Cir.· 1952-11-10 ·cited 18×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the statute requires disclosure of the FBI investigative report to the registrant before or at the hearing.
• Ex parte Zimmerman. Zimmerman v. Walker
  132 F.2d 442· 9th Cir.· 1942-12-14 ·cited 18×·via Right To Confrontation
  The denial of the writ of habeas corpus was proper because the privilege of the writ was lawfully suspended due to invasion and the petition did not demonstrate entitlement to relief.
• Gonzalez v. State
  786 So. 2d 559· Fla.· 2001-05-10 ·cited 17×
  Ricardo Gonzalez appeals his death sentence imposed following a resentencing hearing ordered by the Florida Supreme Court. The Court affirms the death penalty, finding the trial court properly evaluated mitigating evidence and that the sentence is proportional to similar capital
• Lucas v. State
  630 So. 2d 597· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-11-22 ·cited 17×
  David Lucas appeals his convictions for attempted second-degree murder, sexual battery, armed robbery, and kidnapping, raising six issues concerning jury instructions, evidentiary errors, and sentencing. The court reverses his attempted murder conviction due to insufficient jury
• United States v. Balfany
  965 F.2d 575· 8th Cir.· 1992-05-13 ·cited 17×
• MAY v. Collins
  955 F.2d 299· 5th Cir.· 1992-02-26 ·cited 17×·via Confrontation Of Witnesses
  The court granted the certificate of probable cause to appeal, finding the issue debatable among jurists of reason, but ultimately affirmed the district court's denial of the writ, holding the state court's 'paper hearing' was adequate for § 2254(d) presumption of correctness.
• United States v. Lucas
  932 F.2d 1210· 8th Cir.· 1991-04-26 ·cited 17×
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences, except for specific sentencing enhancements on certain counts, which were vacated and remanded for resentencing.
• Tapia v. Tansy
  926 F.2d 1554· 10th Cir.· 1991-03-05 ·cited 17×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the loss of preliminary hearing tapes, the sealing of an affidavit, the submission of a second-degree murder instruction on an accessory theory, the admission of allegedly perjured testimony, and ineffective assistance of counsel did not violate the defendant'
• Norris v. Risley
  918 F.2d 828· 9th Cir.· 1990-11-08 ·cited 17×·via Right To Confrontation
  The presence of spectators wearing buttons that conveyed an implied message of guilt, without being subject to confrontation or cross-examination, created an unacceptable risk of prejudice, thus denying the defendant a fair trial.
• United States v. Shearn Moody, Jr.
  903 F.2d 321· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-30 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the trial court erred by prohibiting the impeachment of hearsay declarants and by denying the defendant an opportunity for surrebuttal testimony, requiring reversal and remand.
• United States v. Sensi
  879 F.2d 888· D.C. Cir.· 1989-07-11 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the indictment was valid under the extradition treaty and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• Hardin v. Black
  845 F.2d 953· 11th Cir.· 1988-05-23 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying a procedural bar to seventeen claims, which must be reconsidered on the merits, and affirmed the denial of other claims.
• Lawson v. Murray
  837 F.2d 653· 4th Cir.· 1988-01-25 ·cited 17×·via Right To Confrontation
  Striking a defense witness's testimony is permissible when the witness invokes the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination to frustrate the purpose of cross-examination, even if it impairs the defendant's right to present witnesses.
• United States v. Gilbert
  774 F.2d 962· 9th Cir.· 1985-10-21 ·cited 17×
  The court held that evidence seized during a protective sweep of a mobile home and a fingerprint card were admissible, affirming the conviction.
• Ferguson v. State
  474 So. 2d 208· Fla.· 1985-06-27 ·cited 17×·via Right To Confrontation
  John Erroll Ferguson appeals his death sentence following resentencing ordered by the Florida Supreme Court. The Court affirms the death sentence, finding no error in the trial court's refusal to hold an evidentiary hearing, its application of the cold, calculated, and premeditat
• United States v. Medina-Gasca
  739 F.2d 1451· 9th Cir.· 1984-08-10 ·cited 17×
• United States v. Johnson
  722 F.2d 407· 8th Cir.· 1983-12-07 ·cited 17×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The court held that the admission of a serial number report from the ATF establishing interstate commerce was not plain error, and any hearsay in the certification was harmless. The evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction.
• Kelly v. State
  425 So. 2d 81· Fla. 2d DCA· 1982-12-17 ·cited 17×
  The defendant appeals his convictions for conspiracy to traffic in cannabis and trafficking in cannabis, claiming he was denied his constitutional right to fully cross-examine the prosecution's star witness, Paul Scott. The court agreed that Scott's invocation of his Fifth Amendm
• United States v. Carter
  619 F.2d 293· 3d Cir.· 1980-04-25 ·cited 17×
  Deviations from Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 in accepting a guilty plea constitute reversible error if they affect substantial rights, requiring vacation of the sentence.
• Harris v. Spears
  606 F.2d 639· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-16 ·cited 17×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the district court correctly granted the writ of habeas corpus, finding that the defendant's procedural defaults were excused by cause and prejudice, and not a deliberate bypass of state procedures.
• Walden v. State
  284 So. 2d 440· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-10-09 ·cited 17×·via Sixth Amendment Right To Confront Witnesses
  Alexander Walden appealed the denial of his motion to vacate his conviction for robbery and assault with intent to commit murder, arguing that a third party's confession to the crimes should have been admitted at a hearing on his post-conviction motion. The court held that the tr
• United States ex rel. Sylvester Johnson & Stanley Cassidy v. Yeager
  399 F.2d 508· 3d Cir.· 1968-08-23 ·cited 17×
  The admission of co-defendants' confessions in a joint trial, even with limiting instructions, violates the Confrontation Clause when the confessions implicate defendants who did not testify, requiring a new trial or further proceedings.
• Whitney v. Cochran
  152 So. 2d 727· Fla.· 1963-04-19 ·cited 17×·via Right To Confrontation
  Dennis Whitney, a 17-year-old sentenced to death for first-degree murder, petitioned for habeas corpus claiming his conviction was tainted by denial of due process. The Florida Supreme Court upheld his conviction, rejecting arguments that his stipulation to facts was coercive, th
• Fehringer v. State
  976 So. 2d 1218· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-03-26 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court erred by prohibiting defense counsel from proffering the minor victim's testimony regarding a prior accusation of sexual assault against another man, as this prevented effective appellate review.
• Randell C. Leighty v. State
  981 So. 2d 484· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-03-05 ·cited 16×
  Randell Leighty appeals his conviction for three counts of first-degree murder and robbery with a firearm. The court affirms the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress his pre-trial statement and denial of his motion to use a witness deposition in place of live testimony,
• United States v. Neely
  980 F.2d 1074· 7th Cir.· 1992-11-18 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no merit in the defendants' challenges to evidentiary rulings and prosecutorial conduct.
• United States v. Abreu
  952 F.2d 1458· 1st Cir.· 1992-01-03 ·cited 16×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The court affirmed the conviction on most counts, vacating the conspiracy conviction due to double jeopardy concerns, and found no abuse of discretion in admitting evidence.
• United States v. Ferguson
  935 F.2d 862· 7th Cir.· 1991-06-19 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the prosecutor's use of peremptory strikes based on youth and unemployment was not a Batson violation, and the defendant failed to prove his prior guilty pleas were unconstitutional for sentence enhancement purposes.
• United States v. Strickland
  935 F.2d 822· 7th Cir.· 1991-06-11 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its rulings regarding juror contact, admission of redacted grand jury testimony, jury instructions, and admission of foreign bank records.
• United States v. Colin
  928 F.2d 676· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-01 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the officer had sufficient justification to stop the vehicle, frisk the defendant, and arrest him, and that the release of a material witness did not violate the defendant's rights.
• United States v. Dickerson
  901 F.2d 579· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-01 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confront Accusers
  The court held that the district court properly applied the sentencing enhancement statute, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), considering both the defendant's 1982 Illinois burglary conviction and 1975 Illinois robbery conviction as 'violent felonies'.
• THE Florida BAR v. Weed
  559 So. 2d 1094· Fla.· 1990-03-01 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the referee's findings of guilt and recommendations for discipline were supported by competent, substantial evidence and were not erroneous.
• Rogers-Bey v. Lane
  896 F.2d 279· 7th Cir.· 1990-02-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Illinois appellate court's finding of waiver was an independent and adequate basis for decision, even though it also analyzed the issue for plain error.