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. Carmine Fatico
  579 F.2d 707· 2d Cir.· 1978-06-12 ·cited 107×
  The court held that the Due Process and Confrontation Clauses do not prevent the use of information from an unidentified informant in sentencing if there is good cause for nondisclosure and the information is sufficiently corroborated.
• United States v. Streeter
  907 F.2d 781· 8th Cir.· 1990-06-29 ·cited 106×
  The court held that a district court's departure from Sentencing Guidelines requires specific findings of circumstances not adequately considered by the Commission, and that the Drug Quantity Table's equivalency of 100 grams per marijuana plant is invalid as applied when the stat
• United States v. Rogers
  549 F.2d 490· 8th Cir.· 1976-12-30 ·cited 106×
  The court held that admitting an ex parte statement for impeachment when the declarant was unavailable for cross-examination and had not harmed the prosecution's case was improper and prejudicial.
• Peterson v. United States
  344 F.2d 419· 5th Cir.· 1965-04-13 ·cited 106×
  The court held that admitting former testimony of an unavailable witness without sufficient predicate and improperly instructing the jury on essential elements of the charges constituted reversible error.
• Hayward v. State
  24 So. 3d 17· Fla.· 2009-08-27 ·cited 105×
  Steven Douglas Hayward was convicted of first-degree murder, armed robbery, armed burglary, and firearm possession for the 2005 shooting death of newspaper delivery man Daniel Destefano in Florida. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and death sentence, rejecting m
• United States v. MacHado
  804 F.2d 1537· 11th Cir.· 1986-12-03 ·cited 105×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the admission of coconspirator statements, denial of severance motions, limitations on cross-examination, or sufficiency of evidence for the charges.
• United States v. Ordonez
  737 F.2d 793· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-23 ·cited 105×
  The court held that the Ninth Circuit's refusal to adopt the rule of per se admissibility for statements falling within firmly rooted hearsay exceptions is incorrect and conflicts with Supreme Court precedent.
• United States v. Murray
  618 F.2d 892· 2d Cir.· 1980-01-30 ·cited 105×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous, the jury selection was proper, evidentiary rulings were correct, the government was not required to prove non-registration, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Terry
  702 F.2d 299· 2d Cir.· 1983-02-18 ·cited 103×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that warrantless trash searches are permissible when trash is abandoned, and electronic surveillance orders are valid if supported by probable cause and properly authorized. The court reversed one conviction due to insufficient evidence.
• 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
• United States v. Gennaro J. Angiulo
  897 F.2d 1169· 1st Cir.· 1990-03-05 ·cited 101×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court affirmed the defendants' convictions and sentences but reversed certain portions of the forfeiture order.
• United States v. Robertson
  582 F.2d 1356· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-03 ·cited 101×
  The court held that the defendant's confession, even if bargained for and involving third parties, was not necessarily protected plea negotiation under the rules if the defendant could not reasonably believe bargaining was occurring due to agent disclaimers.
• 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.
• Fountain v. United States
  384 F.2d 624· 5th Cir.· 1967-08-09 ·cited 100×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting recorded telephone conversations and transcripts, nor in limiting cross-examination regarding a witness's finances, as these actions did not deprive appellants of their constitutional rights.
• Penalver v. State
  926 So. 2d 1118· Fla.· 2006-02-02 ·cited 99×·via Right To Confrontation
  Seth Penalver was convicted of three counts of first-degree murder in connection with a home invasion robbery that resulted in three deaths captured on video surveillance. The Florida Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial due to cumulative evidentiary errors, includ
• United States v. Howard "Sonny" Hawkins
  661 F.2d 436· 5th Cir.· 1981-11-16 ·cited 99×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the jury selection, cross-examination restrictions, alleged prosecutorial misconduct, refusal of a James hearing, or judicial bias.
• Coxwell v. State
  361 So. 2d 148· Fla.· 1978-07-20 ·cited 99×·via Right To Confrontation
  Chester Coxwell was convicted of first-degree murder for procuring the killing of his wife and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court reversed his conviction based on the trial judge's improper restriction of cross-examination of the key prosecution witness regarding plans
• United States v. King
  552 F.2d 833· 9th Cir.· 1976-12-16 ·cited 99×
  The court held that the admission of deposition testimony under 18 U.S.C. § 3503 was constitutional, both facially and as applied, and that the defendants' departure from the deposition constituted a waiver of their objections.
• United States v. Balistrieri
  779 F.2d 1191· 7th Cir.· 1985-11-12 ·cited 98×
  The court held that the defendant's recusal motions were properly denied because the affidavits did not sufficiently allege facts that would convince a reasonable person that the judge harbored personal bias or prejudice from an extrajudicial source.
• United States v. Lyon
  397 F.2d 505· 7th Cir.· 1968-06-27 ·cited 98×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The court should have reversed and remanded the conviction of appellant Lysczyk due to a defective search warrant affidavit.
• United States v. Norton
  867 F.2d 1354· 11th Cir.· 1989-03-16 ·cited 96×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that various evidentiary and prosecutorial rulings were not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. Grammatikos
  633 F.2d 1013· 2d Cir.· 1980-09-05 ·cited 96×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court affirmed the conviction on Count Two, but the dissenting judge argued for a remand on Counts One and Three due to the destruction of exculpatory evidence.
• United States v. McCLINTOCK
  748 F.2d 1278· 9th Cir.· 1984-06-05 ·cited 95×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the search warrant was sufficiently particular and that the government's conduct, while ethically questionable, did not rise to the level of a constitutional violation or warrant reversal under supervisory powers. The prior conviction was admissible for impeac
• United States v. Gordon
  580 F.2d 827· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-22 ·cited 95×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient probable cause for the search warrant, sufficient evidence to support the conspiracy conviction, and no reversible error in the admission of testimony regarding destroyed evidence or the delegation of authority to schedule co
• Young v. State
  85 Fla. 348· Fla.· 1923-03-15 ·cited 95×·via Right To Confrontation
  W. H. Young was convicted of manslaughter in the death of Henry B. Driggers and challenged his conviction on two main grounds: (1) that he was denied a fair trial due to the admission of a biased juror, and (2) that the trial court improperly admitted the prior trial testimony of
• United States v. Varella
  692 F.2d 1352· 11th Cir.· 1982-12-06 ·cited 94×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in limiting cross-examination of informants, denying severance motions, or admitting hearsay statements made in furtherance of a continuing conspiracy.
• United States v. Bell
  464 F.2d 667· 2d Cir.· 1972-07-05 ·cited 94×
  Searches of airplane passengers are permissible beyond specific profiles and magnetometer activations, as the danger to human lives justifies broader searches.
• State v. Gillespie
  227 So. 2d 550· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-10-31 ·cited 94×·via Right To Confrontation
  Florida's appellate court addressed when prosecutors must disclose evidence to criminal defendants pre-trial, holding that absent a proper predicate (specific facts suggesting Brady violations), courts cannot compel blanket in camera inspection of prosecution files on mere demand
• United States v. Buckley
  586 F.2d 498· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-18 ·cited 93×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that failure to file a tax return is a lesser included offense of attempted tax evasion when the failure to file is the affirmative act relied upon for the evasion charge, and thus convictions for both cannot stand. The court also held that the trial court did not
• 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.
• Thompson v. State
  619 So. 2d 261· Fla.· 1993-04-01 ·cited 92×·via Right To Confrontation
  William Lee Thompson appealed his death sentence imposed after remand for resentencing in a 1976 kidnapping-murder case. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the death penalty, finding harmless error regarding the admission of autopsy photographs and the use of the 'cold, calculate
• United States v. Foster
  711 F.2d 871· 9th Cir.· 1983-07-26 ·cited 92×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence for conspiracy and substantive counts, valid search warrants, and proper admission of evidence, with any errors deemed harmless.
• United States v. Madison
  689 F.2d 1300· 7th Cir.· 1982-09-28 ·cited 92×·via Right To Confrontation
  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. Rivera-Santiago
  872 F.2d 1073· 1st Cir.· 1989-03-30 ·cited 91×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendants of conspiracy to possess and distribute marihuana, and affirmed the convictions. The court also found that the trial court's refusal to give a specific cautionary instruction was not reversible error.
• 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.
• Franqui v. State
  699 So. 2d 1332· Fla.· 1997-07-03 ·cited 90×
  Leonardo Franqui was convicted of first-degree murder of a police officer and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions but reversed his death sentence, finding that the admission of a codefendant's confession violated his Sixth Amendment right to con
• United States v. Severo D. Espinosa
  771 F.2d 1382· 10th Cir.· 1985-08-26 ·cited 90×·via Right To Confrontation
  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. Meacham
  626 F.2d 503· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-26 ·cited 90×·via Sixth Amendment Right To Confront Witnesses
  The court held that the statutes under which the defendants were convicted do not criminalize conspiracy to attempt an offense, and therefore the indictments failed to charge an offense. The court also held that the refusal to allow a defendant to cross-examine a government witne
• United States v. Noble C. Beasley
  519 F.2d 233· 8th Cir.· 1975-09-05 ·cited 90×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court affirmed the conviction for conspiracy and tax evasion but reversed the sentence for filing a fraudulent tax return, finding no plain error in the jury instructions or the denial of severance.
• United States v. Jackson
  482 F.2d 1167· 10th Cir.· 1973-07-23 ·cited 90×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for smuggling and conspiracy, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, or venue determination.
• United States v. Harper
  450 F.2d 1032· 5th Cir.· 1971-10-25 ·cited 90×
  The court held that the admission of testimony from court-appointed doctors regarding competency, the use of medical reports for impeachment, jury instructions on the presumption of sanity, and the sufficiency of evidence were all proper.
• United States v. McLERNON
  746 F.2d 1098· 6th Cir.· 1984-09-18 ·cited 89×
  The court held that a voluntariness instruction was not required when the defense strategy was to deny the statement was made, and that items seized in plain view were properly seized under the plain view exception to the warrant requirement.
• United States v. Laurence John Layton
  720 F.2d 548· 9th Cir.· 1983-08-10 ·cited 89×
  The court held that the district court erred in excluding certain pre-arrival statements by Jim Jones under the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule, and that the government's appeal of the exclusion order was properly before the court.
• 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.
• United States v. Alston
  460 F.2d 48· 5th Cir.· 1972-05-18 ·cited 89×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion by refusing to require an undercover agent to divulge his home address, as the defendant was afforded sufficient opportunity to place the witness in his proper setting and the agent had a reasonable fear for his safety.
• James v. United States
  416 F.2d 467· 5th Cir.· 1969-09-17 ·cited 89×
  The court held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction and that various alleged trial errors, including issues with jury selection, indictment sufficiency, search warrants, joinder, co-defendant statements, jury instructions, grand jury testimony disclosure, de
• United States v. Scully
  225 F.2d 113· 2d Cir.· 1955-07-26 ·cited 89×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the mere possibility that a witness may later be indicted does not require that they be advised of their Fifth Amendment rights when testifying before a Grand Jury.
• United States v. Zapata
  871 F.2d 616· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-24 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior drug transaction, refusing to strike testimony after a witness invoked the Fifth Amendment, or admitting hotel registration records. Any error in the jury instruction regarding pr
• Jones v. State
  440 So. 2d 570· Fla.· 1983-09-15 ·cited 88×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  Leo Jones was convicted of first-degree murder in the shooting death of Police Officer Thomas Szafranski and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence, rejecting challenges to the warrantless search of Jones's apartment, the admission of h