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

• Gerson Merrill Kartman v. Parratt
  535 F.2d 450· 8th Cir.· 1976-05-12 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confront Adverse Witnesses
  Procedural errors in probation revocation hearings were not prejudicial, and therefore, habeas corpus relief is not warranted.
• Dezso John Lokos v. Capps
  528 F.2d 576· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-12 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the district court erred in failing to consider all of the petitioner's habeas corpus claims, requiring remand for further proceedings on those claims. The court affirmed the denial of relief on the involuntary confession claim.
• Artis v. The United States
  506 F.2d 1387· Ct. Cl.· 1974-12-18 ·cited 16×
  A plaintiff must exhaust all available administrative and military remedies under 10 U.S.C. § 869 before filing suit in a civilian court to challenge a court-martial conviction.
• Ira C. Chapman v. State
  302 So. 2d 136· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-10-09 ·cited 16×·via Sixth Amendment Right To Confront Witnesses
  Chapman was convicted of rape and sentenced to 75 years in prison. On appeal, the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court violated Chapman's Sixth Amendment confrontation rights by allowing a deposition taken in his inv
• Radcliff v. Park Anderson
  509 F.2d 1093· 10th Cir.· 1974-06-14 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confrontation
• Alexander v. State
  288 So. 2d 538· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-01-08 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confrontation
  Andrew Alexander was convicted of unlawful heroin possession following a non-jury trial where the State marked heroin packets for identification but never actually introduced them into evidence. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the corpus delicti of dru
• United States v. Everidge
  488 F.2d 1· 9th Cir.· 1973-11-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that statements made by a coconspirator during the course of the conspiracy are admissible under the coconspirator exception to the hearsay rule, even if the coconspirator does not testify, and do not violate the Confrontation Clause.
• Hill v. Nelson
  466 F.2d 1346· 9th Cir.· 1972-08-29 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confrontation
  A federal court may not presume the correctness of state court factual findings unless they are written findings from the trial court, not merely statements in an appellate opinion.
• Horne Bros., Inc. v. Laird
  463 F.2d 1268· D.C. Cir.· 1972-05-17 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confront Accusers
  A contractor's suspension for over one month without an opportunity to be heard or rebut charges violates fundamental fairness, but rejection of a bid within one month of suspension is permissible.
• State v. DeVILLE
  258 So. 2d 492· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-02-29 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confront Accusers
  Florida appeals a trial court order excluding testimony of a key witness based on the defendant's alleged inability to obtain a pretrial deposition. The appellate court reversed, finding the trial court abused its discretion by excluding the witness's testimony as punishment for
• Close v. United States
  450 F.2d 152· 4th Cir.· 1971-10-20 ·cited 16×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The court held that the admission of co-defendants' oral confessions was harmless error for the armed bank robbery convictions but required reversal for the interstate transportation of stolen property conviction.
• Abe Lincoln v. The Cal. Adult Auth.
  435 F.2d 133· 9th Cir.· 1970-11-30 ·cited 16×·via Confrontation Of Witnesses
  The court held that the appellant's allegations did not present a substantial constitutional question, thus a three-judge court was not required and the dismissal was proper.
• United States v. Spencer
  415 F.2d 1301· 7th Cir.· 1969-08-22 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for selling heroin was valid, rejecting claims regarding insufficient evidence, improper hearsay, failure to call a witness, and self-incrimination.
• Cockrell v. Oberhauser
  413 F.2d 256· 9th Cir.· 1969-06-06 ·cited 16×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The admission of a codefendant's confession implicating Leroy, and Leroy's silence in response, violated his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights, and the error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The Bruton rule does not apply to bench trials, so Ivy's confrontation claim fa
• Rios-Ramirez v. United States
  403 F.2d 1016· 9th Cir.· 1968-11-29 ·cited 16×
  The admission of a codefendant's extrajudicial statements at a joint trial does not violate the confrontation clause if the codefendant testifies and is subject to cross-examination.
• United States v. Gilmore
  398 F.2d 679· 7th Cir.· 1968-07-25 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confrontation
• Robbins v. Small
  371 F.2d 793· 1st Cir.· 1967-01-31 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the prosecutor's use of leading questions based on a witness's inadmissible statement, which the witness refused to answer on Fifth Amendment grounds, violated the Confrontation Clause and was not cured by jury instructions.
• Miller v. Eklund
  364 F.2d 976· 9th Cir.· 1966-08-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the petitioner's allegations regarding unlawful arrest, search, interrogation, lack of counsel, confrontation, and self-incrimination did not establish grounds for federal habeas corpus relief.
• Holman v. Caliph Washington
  364 F.2d 618· 5th Cir.· 1966-08-08 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the admission of prior trial testimony of an absent witness, without a proper predicate showing diligent search and unavailability, violated the petitioner's Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The court reversed the district court's finding regarding the c
• COX v. United States
  351 F.2d 280· 8th Cir.· 1965-10-08 ·cited 16×·via Right To Confront Accusers
  The court held that issues of illegal arrest and search/seizure, if known at trial, cannot be raised in a § 2255 motion and must be addressed on direct appeal.
• Dickens v. State
  165 So. 2d 811· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-06-24 ·cited 16×·via Confrontation Of Witnesses
  Oliver Dickens appealed the denial of his post-conviction relief motion, challenging three 1946 guilty plea convictions for breaking and entering entered when he was 17, unrepresented, and without parental knowledge. The court reversed, finding the trial court abused its discreti
• Dixon v. United States
  211 F.2d 547· 5th Cir.· 1954-03-31 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a search warrant is not invalid due to a four-day lapse between the observed offense and the warrant's execution, nor because the affiant's name might be fictitious, nor because the owner was not named.
• In re Amendments to the Florida Evidence Code
  144 So. 3d 536· Fla.· 2014-07-10 ·cited 15×
  The Florida Supreme Court considered whether to adopt three recent legislative amendments to the Florida Evidence Code and related statutes. The Court adopted one amendment concerning hearsay exceptions but declined to adopt two others regarding fiduciary lawyer-client privilege
• Lucas v. State
  67 So. 3d 332· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-07-13 ·cited 15×
  Eric Lucas appeals his convictions for burglary of a dwelling with battery and aggravated battery. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed, rejecting challenges to the admission of his girlfriend's statements to police, jailhouse telephone recordings, and prosecutorial remar
• Chavez v. State
  25 So. 3d 49· Fla. 1st DCA· 2009-12-08 ·cited 15×
  Daniel Chavez was convicted of first-degree murder in the death of his wife, Kathy Chavez. The court reverses his conviction because the trial court erroneously admitted hearsay statements regarding Chavez's threats to harm his wife under the common-law doctrine of forfeiture by
• Pantoja v. State
  990 So. 2d 626· Fla. 1st DCA· 2008-09-04 ·cited 15×
  Juan Pantoja appeals his conviction for sexual battery and lewd or lascivious molestation, challenging the trial court's exclusion of evidence that the victim had previously made a false accusation of sexual abuse against her uncle. The First District Court of Appeal affirms, hol
• Etavius Carlyle v. State
  945 So. 2d 540· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-11-29 ·cited 15×·via Right To Confrontation
  Etavius Carlyle appeals his convictions for attempted second-degree murder and four counts of sexual battery with a deadly weapon or force causing injury. The appellate court affirmed his convictions, rejecting his arguments that three sexual battery counts should have been dismi
• Russell v. State
  920 So. 2d 683· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-01-20 ·cited 15×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  Anthony Russell's probation was revoked based on battery charges against his pregnant girlfriend. Russell appealed on hearsay and Sixth Amendment confrontation grounds, arguing that victim statements should have been inadmissible. The Fifth District affirmed the revocation, holdi
• Blandenburg v. State
  890 So. 2d 267· Fla. 1st DCA· 2004-11-05 ·cited 15×
  Mary Blandenburg's probation was revoked based primarily on hearsay statements from her son and daughter regarding an alleged stabbing incident. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting the hearsay statements under the excited
• Perry v. State
  842 So. 2d 301· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-04-17 ·cited 15×·via Right To Confrontation
  A court may revoke pretrial release and order detention based solely on a probable cause affidavit for a new crime, consistent with section 903.0471, Florida Statutes.
• Preston v. State
  641 So. 2d 169· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-08-09 ·cited 15×
  Thomas Preston appeals his convictions for aggravated battery and false imprisonment. The Florida appellate court reverses and remands for a new trial due to the trial court's failure to conduct a Batson-type inquiry (Neil inquiry) into the prosecutor's gender-based peremptory ch
• United States v. George
  960 F.2d 97· 9th Cir.· 1992-03-24 ·cited 15×
  The admission of hearsay statements made by a child victim to her examining physician and a tribal investigator did not violate the Confrontation Clause, and the denial of a new trial based on the victim's recantation was not an abuse of discretion.
• Olga Romani, M.D. v. State
  528 So. 2d 15· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-05-24 ·cited 15×
  Dr. Olga Romani was convicted of conspiracy to commit first-degree murder and first-degree murder of Dr. Gerardo DeMola, who was killed in 1981. On appeal, Romani challenged the trial judge's admission of coconspirator hearsay statements, arguing they lacked independent corrobora
• United States v. Miller
  830 F.2d 1073· 9th Cir.· 1987-10-22 ·cited 15×
  The court held that 18 U.S.C. § 3292 can be applied to suspend the statute of limitations even after foreign evidence has been recovered, and that 18 U.S.C. § 3505 is constitutional as applied to admit certified foreign bank records.
• Sturgis v. Goldsmith
  796 F.2d 1103· 9th Cir.· 1986-08-11 ·cited 15×·via Right To Confront Accusers
  A defendant does not have a constitutional right to be present at a competency hearing, as it is a preliminary proceeding and not a critical stage of trial.
• Joyner v. United States
  547 F.2d 1199· 4th Cir.· 1977-01-24 ·cited 15×
  The court held that a co-defendant's prior inconsistent statements, though generally inadmissible as substantive evidence, can be admitted as substantive evidence against another defendant if they fall under the coconspirator rule. The court also held that the issue of entrapment
• In re Letter Rogatory From the Just. Court
  523 F.2d 562· 6th Cir.· 1975-09-25 ·cited 15×
  The court held that 28 U.S.C. § 1782 applies to documentary evidence sought for use in a foreign criminal proceeding and that the appellant has standing to challenge the subpoena.
• Loftis v. Beto
  450 F.2d 599· 5th Cir.· 1971-10-08 ·cited 15×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The court held that even if the co-defendant's guilty plea before the jury violated the petitioner's confrontation rights, the error was harmless due to overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Fort
  443 F.2d 670· D.C. Cir.· 1970-12-14 ·cited 15×
  The court affirmed the conviction for contempt of Congress, holding that the statute is constitutional and that the appellant was not denied any constitutionally protected rights during the investigation.
• Mitchell v. United States
  434 F.2d 230· 9th Cir.· 1970-11-17 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the defendant waived objections to the jury verdict's omission of a count and the indictment's duplicity by failing to raise them at trial. The court also found no merit in other assignments of error.
• Cafeteria & Rest. Workers Union, Local 473, AFL-CIO v. McELROY
  284 F.2d 173· D.C. Cir.· 1960-04-14 ·cited 15×
  The court held that a privately employed worker's access to government property is a privilege that can be withdrawn by those in charge of the property without a hearing, confrontation, or cross-examination. The court also affirmed its authority to rehear cases en banc to correct
• United States v. Douglas
  155 F.2d 894· 7th Cir.· 1946-06-15 ·cited 15×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that submitting affidavits containing the government's proof to the jury, even with an instruction that the information was not evidence, constituted reversible error.
• Lee v. State
  115 Fla. 30· Fla.· 1934-05-25 ·cited 15×·via Right To Confrontation
  Edward Lee and Ray Kirby were convicted of first-degree murder in the 1932 killing of Orlo Brown. The Florida Supreme Court reversed their convictions, finding that the State's failure to disclose the names of key witnesses (who were themselves co-defendants and confessed partici
• Royce Goldsmith v. State
  182 So. 3d 824· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-01-06 ·cited 14×
  Royce Goldsmith appeals his convictions for robbery, assault, and firearm possession, and the revocation of his probation. The court affirmed his robbery and assault convictions and probation revocation, but reversed his firearm possession conviction due to a discovery violation
• Katlein v. State of Fla. & Jeffrey Weaver
  731 So. 2d 87· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-04-07 ·cited 14×·via Right To Confrontation
  Petitioner Katlein, a prosecution witness in a murder case, sought certiorari review of a trial court order requiring disclosure of his mental health and substance abuse treatment records from jail to the defendant Weaver. The court held that merely volunteering as a witness does
• Harrell v. State
  689 So. 2d 400· Fla. 3d DCA· 1997-03-05 ·cited 14×
  David Harrell was convicted of robbery, burglary, and assault based partly on live satellite testimony from two victims testifying from Argentina. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that satellite testimony does not violate the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Cl
• United States v. Figueroa
  976 F.2d 1446· 1st Cir.· 1992-10-07 ·cited 14×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the denial of severance motions, evidentiary rulings, or the admission of tape transcripts and background hearsay.
• United States v. Schwarck
  961 F.2d 121· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in considering testimony from a prior trial, in its finding of drug quantity, or in determining the defendant's role as a manager or supervisor.
• United States v. Concemi
  957 F.2d 942· 1st Cir.· 1992-03-04 ·cited 14×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no abuse of discretion or plain error in the trial court's rulings regarding jury instructions, evidence exclusion, Fifth Amendment privilege, subpoena quashing, sufficiency of evidence, or denial of a continuance.
• United States v. Robinson
  956 F.2d 1388· 7th Cir.· 1992-02-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of a single conspiracy and that the district court did not err in admitting co-conspirator statements, jury instructions, tape recordings, transcripts, or evidence of prior marijuana conspiracy and imprisonment.