Federal Rule Of Evidence 403

2,249 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Empire GAS Corp. v. Am. Bakeries Co.
  840 F.2d 1333· 7th Cir.· 1988-02-16 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the jury instruction regarding the "unreasonably disproportionate" proviso in Illinois' Uniform Commercial Code § 2-306(1) was erroneous, requiring reversal and a new trial.
• United States v. Currier
  836 F.2d 11· 1st Cir.· 1987-12-10 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the documents presented did not trigger the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act and that the tape recording was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 403.
• United States v. Andiarena
  823 F.2d 673· 1st Cir.· 1987-07-13 ·cited 28×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no merit in the defendant's claims regarding the admission of prior bad acts evidence, the completeness of the appellate record, or ineffective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Mendez-Ortiz
  810 F.2d 76· 6th Cir.· 1986-12-04 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding threats and bribery was not plain error and that the defendant was not entitled to an indirect entrapment instruction because he denied the elements of the offense.
• United States v. Arnoldo Moreno-Hinojosa
  804 F.2d 845· 5th Cir.· 1986-11-07 ·cited 28×
  The court held that while prior convictions were admissible, the evidence was insufficient to prove knowing possession of marijuana with intent to distribute.
• Palmerin v. City OF Riverside
  794 F.2d 1409· 9th Cir.· 1986-07-21 ·cited 28×
  The court held that guilty pleas were admissible as admissions of resistance and that the failure to object contemporaneously at trial after an unsuccessful motion in limine did not waive the appeal issue. The court also dismissed the appeal regarding the marijuana due to an inco
• United States v. Moore
  791 F.2d 566· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-23 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the admission of a deceased witness's excited utterance and a bid tabulation sheet as a business record were not abuses of discretion, and that the cross-examination and juror excusal were proper.
• McINNIS v. A.M.F., Inc.
  765 F.2d 240· 1st Cir.· 1985-06-13 ·cited 28×
  The court held that admitting evidence of a plaintiff's settlement with a third-party tortfeasor to prove causation was error under Federal Rule of Evidence 408, requiring a new trial.
• World OF Sleep, Inc. v. La-Z-Boy Chair Co.
  756 F.2d 1467· 10th Cir.· 1985-03-04 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a vertical conspiracy to maintain resale prices is illegal per se, and that sufficient evidence existed to send the Sherman Act claim against La-Z-Boy to the jury. However, insufficient evidence existed to support the claim against Montgomery Ward and Mauldin.
• United States v. Herminio Hernandez
  750 F.2d 1256· 5th Cir.· 1985-01-03 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the admission of inadmissible hearsay testimony, which was then emphasized in closing arguments, denied the defendant a fair trial, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Wilson
  732 F.2d 404· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-04 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, or procedural decisions, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict.
• United States v. Neary
  733 F.2d 210· 2d Cir.· 1984-04-16 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a device using contained natural gas, a timer, and a hotplate to cause an explosion constitutes an 'explosive' under the Explosive Control Act, but admitting evidence of prior unrelated fires was prejudicial error, and the evidence for mail fraud in Count Thre
• United States v. Smith
  727 F.2d 214· 2d Cir.· 1984-01-26 ·cited 28×
  A defendant can be convicted of aiding and abetting a crime even if not explicitly charged in the indictment, provided the government gives notice and evidence supports the theory. Similar act evidence was properly admitted for intent and plan, and any error in admitting extrinsi
• United States v. Carmichael
  685 F.2d 903· 4th Cir.· 1982-08-12 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the vote-buying statute applies to elections where federal and state offices are contested, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy, vote buying, and obstruction of justice.
• United States v. Lebovitz
  669 F.2d 894· 3d Cir.· 1982-01-21 ·cited 28×
  The court held that while the trial judge's exercise of discretion under Rule 403 was proper, the record should explicitly reflect the balancing of probative value against prejudice.
• Excel Handbag Co., Inc. v. Edison Bros. Stores, Inc.
  630 F.2d 379· 5th Cir.· 1980-11-14 ·cited 28×
  The court held that sufficient evidence existed to allow a jury to consider punitive damages for the conversion of goods, but that the evidence was insufficient to support a commercial bribery defense or an antitrust counterclaim based on bribery.
• United States v. McGUIRE
  608 F.2d 1028· 5th Cir.· 1979-12-26 ·cited 28×
  The court held that McGuire's severance and hearsay objections were properly denied, and Rivera's conviction for conspiracy was supported by sufficient evidence, but his convictions for distribution and possession were not.
• Taenzler v. Burlington Northern
  608 F.2d 796· 8th Cir.· 1979-12-19 ·cited 28×
  The court held that expert testimony on future wage increases is admissible in FELA cases, even if it indirectly considers inflation, as long as it is not overly speculative and the jury is properly instructed on present value.
• United States v. Karsky
  610 F.2d 548· 8th Cir.· 1979-12-14 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its jury instructions regarding willfulness or the admission of prior tax returns, and affirmed the conviction.
• United States v. Berdj Keuylian
  602 F.2d 1033· 2d Cir.· 1979-06-14 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the denial of a change of venue was not an abuse of discretion, the warrantless searches of the luggage were private and thus not violative of the Fourth Amendment, and the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• United States v. Back
  588 F.2d 1283· 9th Cir.· 1979-01-04 ·cited 28×
  The dissenting judge holds that the testimony regarding the rape was properly admitted as part of the sequence of events for the charged offense and was not offered to prove character.
• United States v. Nichols
  534 F.2d 202· 9th Cir.· 1976-04-13 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's requests for depositions at government expense and in admitting evidence of prior similar offenses to prove intent.
• Dontae Morris v. State
  219 So. 3d 33· Fla.· 2017-04-27 ·cited 27×
  Dontae Morris appeals his convictions and death sentences for the first-degree premeditated murders of two law enforcement officers shot during a traffic stop. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and sentences, rejecting multiple trial errors and finding the eviden
• United States v. Hopkins
  916 F.2d 207· 5th Cir.· 1990-10-19 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendants' convictions for conspiracy, concealment, misapplication, and false entries, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance or admitting evidence of a prior bad act.
• United States v. Delgado
  903 F.2d 1495· 11th Cir.· 1990-06-25 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the drug trafficking convictions but vacated the sentences in part, remanding for re-sentencing due to errors in imposing supervised release terms for offenses committed before November 1, 1987.
• Feazell v. Tropicana Prods., Inc.
  819 F.2d 1036· 11th Cir.· 1987-06-22 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding testimony, that the pretrial stipulation regarding the burden of proof was binding, and that the findings of fact were sufficiently detailed for appellate review.
• United States v. Blankenship
  775 F.2d 735· 6th Cir.· 1985-10-25 ·cited 27×
  Evidence of other crimes is admissible to prove predisposition to commit similar crimes for profit, even if not highly similar, as long as prejudice does not substantially outweigh probative value.
• Dartez v. Fibreboard Corp.
  765 F.2d 456· 5th Cir.· 1985-07-15 ·cited 27×
  The court held that evidence of increased risk of future disease is inadmissible if it does not meet the reasonable medical probability standard, but mental anguish stemming from fear of such disease is recoverable. Certain evidentiary rulings were found erroneous.
• United States v. Ranney
  719 F.2d 1183· 1st Cir.· 1983-10-19 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding that the defendants' objections regarding collateral estoppel, hypothetical questions, Brady violations, and prosecutorial misconduct were unpersuasive.
• United States v. Pirolli
  673 F.2d 1200· 11th Cir.· 1982-04-23 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting the co-conspirator's statement and the cocaine found in the abandoned bag, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• Smith v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.
  633 F.2d 401· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-22 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence of prior fires and did not err in concluding the trustee in bankruptcy was not an indispensable party.
• United States v. Potter
  616 F.2d 384· 9th Cir.· 1979-12-28 ·cited 27×
  The court held that evidence of sexual conduct with patients was admissible to prove motive and lack of good faith, and that prosecutorial improprieties in closing arguments did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Briscoe
  574 F.2d 406· 8th Cir.· 1978-03-31 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for possession with intent to distribute heroin was supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court did not err in its rulings.
• United States v. McLellan
  958 F.3d 1110· 11th Cir.· 2020-05-06 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding no abuse of discretion in evidentiary rulings and that the Rehaif decision did not divest the court of jurisdiction or require reversal based on plain error. The court also affirmed the sentence as substantively reasonable.
• United States v. Masferrer
  367 F. Supp. 2d 1365· S.D. Fla.· 2005-04-29 ·cited 26×
  The court excluded the government's proffered expert testimony because it failed to meet the reliability and helpfulness standards required by Daubert and Rule 702.
• Long v. State
  610 So. 2d 1276· Fla.· 1992-10-15 ·cited 26×
  Robert Joe Long appeals his conviction and death sentence for the murder of Virginia Johnson. The Florida Supreme Court reverses and remands for a new trial, finding that the trial court erred in allowing the State to introduce edited portions of a CBS videotaped interview withou
• United States v. Horst Werner Joetzki
  952 F.2d 1090· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-19 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed convictions but vacated Gisner's sentence, remanding for resentencing because the district court failed to expressly order consecutive sentences as required by statute when the total punishment exceeded the statutory maximum for the individual counts.
• United States v. Reiswitz
  941 F.2d 488· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-15 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the inclusion of a state robbery as an overt act in a federal conspiracy indictment was permissible and that the jury instructions on conspiracy and aiding and abetting were proper.
• Veranda Beach Club Ltd. P'ship v. W. Sur. Co.
  936 F.2d 1364· 1st Cir.· 1991-06-10 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that no reversible error occurred in the exclusion of claims, evidentiary rulings, or directed verdicts.
• United States v. Alberto Castro (89-1528)
  908 F.2d 85· 6th Cir.· 1990-07-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of money laundering transactions, denying motions to substitute counsel, or in sentencing enhancements, but must make a finding on the admissibility of co-conspirator statements.
• United States v. Defazio
  899 F.2d 626· 7th Cir.· 1990-04-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in disqualifying defense counsel, nor in excluding evidence regarding the defendant's state of mind or hypothetical tax returns, and that admitting attorney testimony was not reversible error.
• United States v. Dalton Green
  887 F.2d 25· 1st Cir.· 1989-10-13 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting firearms and coconspirator statements, nor was the evidence insufficient for conviction.
• United States v. Hudson
  884 F.2d 1016· 7th Cir.· 1989-09-11 ·cited 26×
  Evidence of prior similar acts is admissible under Rule 404(b) if it meets a four-part test, and the trial court has discretion regarding jury instructions and expert testimony.
• United States v. Petitjean
  883 F.2d 1341· 7th Cir.· 1989-09-05 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the defendant's arguments regarding a duplicitous indictment, insufficient evidence, confrontation clause violations, and sentencing procedures were without merit, affirming his convictions.
• United States v. Edelman
  873 F.2d 791· 5th Cir.· 1989-05-15 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the use of interstate commerce facilities under 18 U.S.C. § 1952A is a jurisdictional requirement, not an element of the crime, and the government need not prove the defendant's knowledge of or intent to use such facilities.
• United States v. Ortiz
  857 F.2d 900· 2d Cir.· 1988-09-19 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not err in limiting defense counsel's closing arguments by threatening to admit prior convictions if the defendant raised the issue of personal drug use.
• United States v. Lynn
  856 F.2d 430· 1st Cir.· 1988-09-13 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by impermissibly circumscribing cross-examination regarding a witness's polygraph examination and by admitting evidence of the defendant's prior conviction, thereby impairing the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights.
• United States v. Lego
  855 F.2d 542· 8th Cir.· 1988-08-25 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the investigatory stop, search of the vehicle, admission of evidence under Rule 404(b), and the sentence imposed were all lawful.
• United States v. Echeverri
  854 F.2d 638· 3d Cir.· 1988-08-11 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to provide a specific unanimity instruction for the Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) count and by admitting evidence of other crimes that was not sufficiently probative. However, the erroneous admission of evidence was d
• United States v. Lohman Ray Mays, Jr.
  822 F.2d 793· 8th Cir.· 1987-07-02 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the government sufficiently proved the bank's federally insured status, the admission of dye-stained money was proper, and the admission of prior bad acts evidence was largely permissible, with one exception constituting harmless error. The court also found th