Directed Verdict Of Acquittal

169 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Arnold v. State
  241 So. 2d 192· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-11-17 ·cited 10×
  Charles Ray Arnold was convicted of second-degree murder after being indicted for first-degree murder. On appeal via habeas corpus, he challenged the sufficiency of evidence supporting his conviction, arguing his self-defense testimony was uncontradicted. The appellate court affi
• Pritchett v. United States
  185 F.2d 438· D.C. Cir.· 1950-11-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to direct a verdict, in its jury instructions, or in the prosecutor's closing argument.
• Quincy L. Harris v. State
  415 So. 2d 135· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-06-16 ·cited 9×
  Harris appealed his convictions for first-degree burglary and attempted sexual battery, arguing that the trial court erred in denying his motion for directed verdict based on voluntary intoxication evidence. The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that when intoxicat
• Raneri v. State
  255 So. 2d 291· Fla. 1st DCA· 1971-12-09 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the trial court erred in not granting the appellant's motion for a directed verdict of acquittal because the State failed to produce sufficient evidence to prove the elements of second degree murder.
• United States v. Smith
  564 F.2d 244· 8th Cir.· 1977-10-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that probable cause existed for the warrantless arrest and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for drug conspiracy, distribution, possession, and carrying a firearm during a felony.
• Wells v. State
  249 So. 2d 507· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-06-15 ·cited 8×
  David Wells appealed his conviction for breaking and entering with intent to commit felony grand larceny, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. The court held that a motion for new trial based on insufficiency of evidence is a prerequisite to appellate review of sufficienc
• United States v. Seckler
  431 F.2d 642· 5th Cir.· 1970-09-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that independent evidence corroborating an admission is sufficient to support a conviction, even if not independently sufficient to prove all elements of the crime.
• United States v. Matthews
  419 F.2d 1177· D.C. Cir.· 1969-11-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the D.C. anti-riot statute is not unconstitutionally vague and that a person can be found to have "engaged in" a riot by looting property known to be stolen during the disturbance, thereby aiding and abetting the riot.
• ROE v. United States
  325 F.2d 556· 8th Cir.· 1963-12-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a hearing must be held to determine the appellant's mental competency at the time of his guilty plea, as personal observations and medical reports alone are insufficient when the issue is properly raised.
• Spriggs v. United States
  198 F.2d 782· 9th Cir.· 1952-09-03 ·cited 8×
  Statements made by the appellant to Internal Revenue Agents, even if admissible, were insufficient to sustain a conviction for tax evasion without independent proof of a crime.
• United States v. Brown
  443 F.2d 659· D.C. Cir.· 1970-11-04 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the indigent defendant's request for a free transcript of a prior mistrial and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• Howard v. State
  515 So. 2d 430· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-11-18 ·cited 6×
  Willie Howard was convicted of burglary after the trial court admitted his statements to an armed victim who had recovered stolen property and confronted him at gunpoint. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that Howard's statements were involuntary
• State v. Jones
  404 So. 2d 395· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-10-07 ·cited 6×
  Florida appealed the discharge of Eugene Jones under the speedy trial rule. The trial court had granted Jones a directed verdict of acquittal on the original burglary charge due to a material variance between the information and proof, then dismissed the second burglary informati
• United States v. Gonzalo Villafana
  455 F.2d 478· 5th Cir.· 1972-02-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing a directed verdict of acquittal on the grounds of entrapment, as the evidence showed predisposition and a factual dispute for the jury.
• Edwards v. State
  226 So. 2d 140· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-09-03 ·cited 6×
  Frank Edwards was convicted of grand larceny for failing to deposit money into a corporate bank account as promised. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed the conviction, holding that the State failed to establish a prima facie case because it proved only that Edwards rec
• RAY v. United States
  372 F.2d 80· 9th Cir.· 1967-01-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a general sentence imposed on multiple counts, where the sentence is less than the maximum authorized for any single count with a valid conviction, does not require remand for resentencing if the sentence is construed as concurrent.
• United States v. Moret
  334 F.2d 887· 2d Cir.· 1964-06-30 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would reverse Augustine Moret's conviction because the government's evidence regarding the package of heroin was self-contradictory.
• Furci v. State
  113 So. 2d 272· Fla. 2d DCA· 1959-06-24 ·cited 6×
  Dominick Furci was convicted of grand larceny in connection with stolen camera equipment found in his possession. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed for a new trial because the prosecutor improperly commented on the defendant's failure to testify at trial, violating hi
• Rich v. United States
  261 F.2d 536· 4th Cir.· 1958-11-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant received effective assistance of counsel and had a fair trial, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• Randolph v. State
  290 So. 2d 69· Fla. 3d DCA· 1974-02-19 ·cited 5×
  Johnnie David Randolph was convicted of aggravated assault after being indicted for first-degree murder and sentenced to five years. On appeal, he challenged the sufficiency of evidence to support the verdict, claiming his self-defense testimony was uncontradicted. The appellate
• United States v. Fragoso
  978 F.2d 896· 5th Cir.· 1992-11-23 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the trial court did not err in its Jencks Act determinations, its admission of coconspirator statements, its jury instructions, or its sentencing procedures, and that any errors were harmless.
• Crawford v. State
  606 So. 2d 1204· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-09-18 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the conviction for attempted second-degree murder, finding no fundamental error in the jury instructions. However, it reversed the conviction for aggravated assault, reinstating the jury's verdict for attempted armed robbery.
• United States v. Levin
  973 F.2d 463· 6th Cir.· 1992-08-07 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge argues the district court improperly dismissed the indictment by conducting a pre-trial examination of the evidence, which usurped the grand jury's role and the jury's function at trial.
• United States v. Uradell Hill
  935 F.2d 196· 11th Cir.· 1991-07-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the burden of producing evidence to show that importation of controlled substances was permitted under statutory exceptions rests with the defendant, not the government.
• United States v. Sams
  865 F.2d 713· 6th Cir.· 1988-11-25 ·cited 4×
  The statute of limitations for willfully failing to pay income taxes begins to run when the taxpayer manifests some act of willful nonpayment, not on a fixed date like when the tax is due or the return is filed.
• Clanton v. Bair
  826 F.2d 1354· 4th Cir.· 1987-08-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a trial lawyer's representation was not constitutionally deficient for failing to insist on a psychiatric examination or for calling a witness whose prior statements were inconsistent, as the client provided no indication of mental issues and rejected the exam
• State v. Mars
  473 So. 2d 719· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-05-08 ·cited 4×
  Florida appealed the dismissal of murder charges against Mars after his acquittal on different charges arising from the same incident. The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that the State's prosecutorial errors in filing an erroneous bill of particulars and failing to timely
• Mohler v. State
  466 So. 2d 1233· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-04-10 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Wooldridge
  572 F.2d 1027· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the joinder of defendants and charges was proper, and the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• United States v. Vanis Ray Robbins
  510 F.2d 301· 6th Cir.· 1975-01-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an appeal by the government from a judgment of acquittal based on evidence presented at trial is barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• United States v. Lawrance
  498 F.2d 1065· 5th Cir.· 1974-08-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its rulings regarding witness testimony, prosecutor questions, cross-examination, or the submission of the sanity issue to the jury.
• United States v. Bleckley
  475 F.2d 1225· 5th Cir.· 1973-04-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury was entitled to weigh conflicting evidence regarding the defendant's sanity and was not bound by expert testimony.
• State v. Arlander Williams
  254 So. 2d 798· Fla. 1st DCA· 1971-11-04 ·cited 4×
  An acquittal on a charge of assault with intent to commit murder does not, under the doctrine of collateral estoppel or the single transaction concept, bar a subsequent prosecution for carrying a concealed firearm arising from the same incident.
• United States v. Spenard
  438 F.2d 717· 2d Cir.· 1971-02-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's history of mental illness did not adequately raise an insanity defense, thus the government was not required to prove sanity, and the jury instruction excluding insanity was proper.
• United States v. Parker
  419 F.2d 679· D.C. Cir.· 1969-10-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the prosecutor's remarks, even if carrying an improper implication, were curable by a subsequent disclaimer and that the jury's assessment of witness credibility was proper.
• United States v. Cabell Henning Carrier, Jr.
  344 F.2d 42· 4th Cir.· 1965-03-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding of intent to hinder apprehension and that the jury instructions on intent and burden of proof were adequate.
• Al MAY v. United States
  280 F.2d 555· 6th Cir.· 1960-07-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the two-witness rule for perjury is satisfied even if witnesses testify to the falsity of different factual components of the same overall false statement, and that the materiality of testimony is determined at the time it is given.
• McGEE v. State
  304 So. 2d 142· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-10-23 ·cited 3×
  The convictions of McGee for rape, robbery, and conspiracy; Williams for rape and robbery; and Faison for conspiracy were affirmed, as the evidence was convincing and overwhelming, the jury properly deliberated, and the trial court properly instructed the jury and protected due p
• United States v. O'Hara
  960 F.2d 11· 2d Cir.· 1992-03-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a prior directed verdict of acquittal for alleged co-conspirators does not have preclusive effect on charges against a defendant who pleaded guilty, nor does it constitute a 'fair and just reason' to withdraw the plea.
• March v. State
  458 So. 2d 308· Fla. 5th DCA· 1984-09-13 ·cited 2×
  Three appellants convicted of manslaughter in connection with a drug-related shootout that killed a bystander were affirmed on appeal. The court addressed aiding and abetting liability for all three participants and rejected a self-defense claim, but expressed concern about secta
• Irby v. State
  450 So. 2d 1133· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-04-13 ·cited 2×
  Robert Irby appealed his battery conviction, claiming the trial court improperly denied his motion for discharge based on violation of Florida's speedy trial rule. The court affirmed, holding that Irby was estopped from arguing that the two batteries constituted a single criminal
• Delaughter v. State
  341 So. 2d 235· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-12-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction for shooting into an occupied building was supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court did not err in failing to grant a mistrial or direct a verdict of acquittal.
• Delgado v. State
  319 So. 2d 610· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-09-23 ·cited 2×
• United States v. Morell
  423 F.2d 1212· 5th Cir.· 1970-03-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to charge the jury on entrapment or in denying motions for a directed verdict.
• Conner v. United States
  391 F.2d 926· 5th Cir.· 1968-04-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the record shows no error and amply supports the verdict and judgment, and that the appellant received a fair trial.
• State v. Nesbitt Rolle
  202 So. 2d 867· Fla. 2d DCA· 1967-10-11 ·cited 2×
  Florida appealed the trial court's grant of a new trial in a second-degree murder case, contending the verdict was valid. The appellate court held that when a trial judge finds a jury verdict contrary to law and the weight of evidence in a criminal case, the judge must grant a di
• Bronzin v. United States
  309 F.2d 158· 8th Cir.· 1962-11-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that there was substantial evidence to support the jury's verdict of guilt for mail fraud, and the question of intent was properly for the jury to decide.
• O'Brien v. State
  128 So. 2d 621· Fla. 3d DCA· 1961-04-03 ·cited 2×
  John T. O'Brien was charged with embezzlement/larceny by a bailee of $1,900 from Katherine Coviello between February 5-15, 1959. The appellate court reversed his conviction and remanded with instructions to enter an acquittal, finding the state's proof failed to establish that O'
• Rosenfield v. United States
  216 F.2d 260· 8th Cir.· 1954-10-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for violating the Mann Act and that the admission of certain testimony was not prejudicial error.
• Orrin Devon Maddox v. State
  404 So. 2d 409· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-10-07