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

• Kirksey v. Jones
  673 F.2d 58· 2d Cir.· 1982-03-08 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding that the appellant had not exhausted state remedies for two of his claims and that the one exhausted claim regarding the prosecutor's use of a co-defendant's confession did not violate the Confrontation Clause.
• Parisie v. Greer
  671 F.2d 1011· 7th Cir.· 1982-02-18 ·cited 12×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The court held that the majority's disposition of the case without adequate exploration of premises and ramifications was improper.
• United States v. Brown
  667 F.2d 566· 6th Cir.· 1982-01-08 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the defendants' constitutional rights were not violated and affirmed their conviction for income tax evasion.
• United States v. Bruscino
  662 F.2d 450· 7th Cir.· 1981-10-20 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in ruling that extraneous material exposed to the jury did not prejudice the appellants' case.
• United States v. Rogers
  652 F.2d 972· 10th Cir.· 1981-07-01 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the indictment was valid, severance was not required, and co-defendant statements were admissible, affirming the convictions.
• Nelson v. State
  396 So. 2d 1130· Fla.· 1981-04-02 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
• English v. United States
  620 F.2d 150· 7th Cir.· 1980-03-13 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the appellant was not denied effective assistance of counsel and that the introduction of a co-defendant's confession did not violate the Bruton rule because the contextual inference of guilt was not compelled.
• United States v. Rozen
  600 F.2d 494· 5th Cir.· 1979-08-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove the appellant's participation in the conspiracy or possession of marijuana, and therefore his motion for judgment of acquittal should have been granted.
• Andrews v. State
  372 So. 2d 143· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-06-12 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  Patricia Andrews was convicted of first-degree murder, robbery, burglary, and petty larceny in a joint trial with co-defendant Sublette for the beating death of Louis Broeker during a home invasion. The court affirmed the conviction, rejecting Andrews' claims that denial of sever
• Passmore v. Estelle
  594 F.2d 115· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-27 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the state trial court's ruling barring impeachment by prior incarceration did not violate the Sixth Amendment, but the submission of a one-sentence appellate brief constituted ineffective assistance of counsel under the Fourteenth Amendment.
• United States v. Goins
  593 F.2d 88· 8th Cir.· 1979-02-26 ·cited 12×
  The admission of out-of-court statements made by a deceased witness was proper under the Federal Rules of Evidence and did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment right of confrontation.
• United States v. Montgomery
  582 F.2d 514· 10th Cir.· 1978-06-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that even if a letter could be admissible under the statement against interest exception, the failure to raise this argument at trial precludes finding error on appeal.
• United States v. Phillips
  575 F.2d 97· 6th Cir.· 1978-05-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in allowing cross-examination of the defendant on statements made to FBI agents after he requested a lawyer, nor in admitting fingerprint expert testimony, nor in allowing a probation officer to testify regarding a witness's prior i
• Burkhart v. Stoney Lane
  574 F.2d 346· 6th Cir.· 1978-04-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in summarily dismissing the habeas corpus petition without examining the trial record.
• W. B. and G. B. F. v. State
  356 So. 2d 884· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-03-21 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  Two juveniles were jointly charged with theft of school receipts. The appellate court reversed the adjudication against W.B. due to insufficient evidence (admission of a codefendant's unconfrontable confession), but affirmed the adjudication against G.B.F., holding that Miranda w
• United States v. Williams
  571 F.2d 344· 6th Cir.· 1978-02-22 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  A prior written statement adopted by a witness, even if written by another, is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(5) as recorded recollection if the witness once had knowledge but now has insufficient recollection, and the statement was made or adopted when the matter
• United States v. Mahlon Headid
  565 F.2d 1029· 8th Cir.· 1977-11-14 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination of accomplices and properly handled other evidentiary matters, affirming the convictions.
• United States v. Peden
  556 F.2d 278· 5th Cir.· 1977-07-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the statute prohibiting the transport of stolen credit cards was not unconstitutionally vague and that the admission of business records as evidence of fraudulent intent did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment confrontation rights.
• United States v. Erasmus Flecha
  539 F.2d 874· 2d Cir.· 1976-06-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the admission of a co-defendant's statement against appellant, based solely on his silence while under arrest, was erroneous.
• Augustin R. Bourbois v. United States
  530 F.2d 3· 5th Cir.· 1976-04-16 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the government is not required to disclose the identity of an informant who is a mere tipster and not an active participant in the offense charged.
• United States v. Moody
  530 F.2d 809· 8th Cir.· 1976-03-01 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the admission of other crimes evidence was not an abuse of discretion, but the district court erred in imposing a mandatory 25-year sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 2114.
• United States v. Karnes
  531 F.2d 214· 4th Cir.· 1976-01-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in calling witnesses as court witnesses, even if their testimony was important to the prosecution's case.
• Stewart v. Cowan
  528 F.2d 79· 6th Cir.· 1976-01-07 ·cited 12×
  The admission of hearsay testimony regarding an FBI ballistics report and anonymous phone calls violated the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment because the prosecution failed to show the unavailability of the declarants and the statements lacked sufficient indicia of rel
• Grant v. State
  316 So. 2d 282· Fla.· 1975-06-25 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confront Accusers
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed whether a trial judge properly established a factual basis for a guilty plea to manslaughter under Criminal Procedure Rule 3.170(j). The Court affirmed the plea, holding that while a factual basis determination is required, the negotiated nature
• Hernandez-Uribe v. United States
  515 F.2d 20· 8th Cir.· 1975-05-07 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that collateral estoppel was properly applied to establish the defendant's alien status based on a prior guilty plea, and the jury instruction reflecting this was not erroneous.
• United States v. Qualls
  500 F.2d 1238· 8th Cir.· 1974-07-26 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in restricting cross-examination of government agents regarding their indictments and in limiting the disclosure of an informant's exact address, as effective cross-examination was otherwise permitted.
• United States v. Weldon Mack Gearin
  496 F.2d 691· 5th Cir.· 1974-06-24 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confront Accusers
• Little v. United States
  490 F.2d 686· 8th Cir.· 1974-02-01 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the appellant was not prejudiced by the government's failure to produce the informant at trial, nor by the prosecution's jury selection practices.
• United States v. Perna
  491 F.2d 253· 6th Cir.· 1974-01-31 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the admission of a co-defendant's out-of-court statements implicating the appellant was permissible under the co-conspirator exception to the hearsay rule, even without proof of a formal conspiracy count or the declarant's unavailability.
• United States v. Johnetta Randall
  491 F.2d 1317· 9th Cir.· 1974-01-28 ·cited 12×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the conviction because the independent evidence was insufficient to establish a prima facie case of conspiracy, making the admission of hearsay statements prejudicial error.
• United States v. Morris
  485 F.2d 1385· 5th Cir.· 1973-10-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a defendant does not have a constitutional right to re-cross-examine a witness who dies during a recess, especially when the witness's testimony was fully cross-examined and no new matters were introduced on re-direct.
• Artis Scarborough v. State
  278 So. 2d 657· Fla. 2d DCA· 1973-05-30 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confront Accusers
  A guilty plea is valid even if the defendant pleads to avoid a potential death sentence, provided the plea is knowing and voluntary and counsel's advice was competent.
• United States v. Mercado
  469 F.2d 1148· 2d Cir.· 1972-11-22 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that the defendant was incompetent at the time he committed the acts violating probation, but that he was competent to aid in his defense. The court reversed the probation revocation.
• M'Clary v. Cal. Adult Auth.
  466 F.2d 1122· 9th Cir.· 1972-07-24 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the district court should reconsider the habeas corpus petition in light of recent controlling decisions regarding parole revocation procedures.
• United States v. LaBARBERA
  463 F.2d 988· 7th Cir.· 1972-06-08 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions to dismiss the indictment, limiting cross-examination of a witness for safety reasons, or denying requests for competency examinations, and that the evidence was sufficient for conviction.
• Smith v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  457 F.2d 1098· 9th Cir.· 1972-02-29 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the petition for habeas corpus relief, affirming the denial of all five arguments presented by the petitioner.
• United States v. Rogers
  454 F.2d 601· 7th Cir.· 1971-12-07 ·cited 12×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The court held that the admission of the employer's statement on SSS Form 153, even with a facsimile signature, was permissible as a business/official record exception to hearsay, and that the defendant's own statements corroborated this evidence, sufficient to sustain his convic
• Phillips v. Pitchess
  451 F.2d 913· 9th Cir.· 1971-11-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a retrial after a successful appeal does not violate double jeopardy, and that the denial of a motion for substitution of counsel was a sound exercise of judicial discretion. Habeas corpus relief was denied on all grounds.
• United States ex rel. Burton N. Pugach v. Hon. Vincent B. Mancusi
  441 F.2d 1073· 2d Cir.· 1971-04-20 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the investigatory stratagem used to elicit admissions did not violate the Fifth Amendment and that the admission of a co-defendant's confession did not violate the right of confrontation because the co-defendant testified at trial.
• United States ex rel. William C. Stubbs v. Mancusi
  442 F.2d 561· 2d Cir.· 1971-04-19 ·cited 12×
  The admission of prior testimony from a witness who was not made available for cross-examination at retrial, despite the prosecution's failure to make a good-faith effort to secure his presence, violated the Confrontation Clause and was not harmless error.
• United States v. DeFRISCO
  441 F.2d 137· 5th Cir.· 1971-04-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that credit bureau reports were admissible as business records and that the failure to instruct the jury that the indictment was not evidence was not reversible error.
• United States v. Sims
  434 F.2d 258· 5th Cir.· 1970-11-11 ·cited 12×·via Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)
  The court held that the exclusion of a government witness's prior conviction documents was not prejudicial error, and the admission of a co-defendant's redacted statement did not violate the Sixth Amendment. The conviction was affirmed based on untainted counts.
• State v. Garcia
  240 So. 2d 633· Fla.· 1970-10-21 ·cited 12×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed three District Court of Appeal decisions that had overturned convictions based on Bruton v. United States concerns regarding admission of co-defendants' confessions. The Court held that under specific circumstances—including sufficient independe
• Trigg v. United States
  430 F.2d 372· 7th Cir.· 1970-07-30 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the petitioner's constitutional rights were not violated by the admission of rebuttal testimony, as he waived his right to cross-examine his codefendant and failed to raise the issue on direct appeal.
• State v. Stubbs
  239 So. 2d 241· Fla.· 1970-07-29 ·cited 12×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a District Court of Appeal's decision to reverse a rape conviction based on the admission of a co-defendant's confession. The Supreme Court held that admitting a co-defendant's confession is not reversible error if the defendant's own confession
• United States v. Young
  422 F.2d 302· 8th Cir.· 1970-03-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a conviction under 26 U.S.C. § 4744(a)(1) must be vacated due to Fifth Amendment self-incrimination concerns, but convictions for illegal transfer and conspiracy stand. Admission of a codefendant's extrajudicial statements was harmless error due to overwhelmin
• O'Neil v. Nelson
  422 F.2d 319· 9th Cir.· 1970-01-26 ·cited 12×
  The admission of a co-defendant's out-of-court statement, which inculpated the defendant but was denied by the co-defendant when testifying, violates the Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, and this error was not harmless.
• Collins v. State
  230 So. 2d 711· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-01-26 ·cited 12×
  Robert Collins sought delayed appellate review of his 1964 first-degree murder conviction after his court-appointed counsel failed to timely file a direct appeal. The court treated his petition as an original habeas corpus petition and affirmed the conviction, finding that any co
• Dennis v. State
  214 So. 2d 661· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-10-01 ·cited 12×·via Constitutional Right To Confrontation
  Dennis and Palmer were convicted of robbery after a jury trial in Dade County, Florida. On appeal, they challenged the trial court's exclusion of a cross-examination question regarding pending criminal charges against the state's rebuttal witness, claiming a violation of their co
• Battaglia v. United States
  390 F.2d 256· 9th Cir.· 1968-02-21 ·cited 12×·via Right To Confront Evidence
  The court held that a district court cannot base its decision on undisclosed information from a presentence report, as this violates due process and the right to confront evidence.