Federal Rule Of Evidence 403

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

• United States v. Hatfield
  815 F.2d 1068· 6th Cir.· 1987-04-03 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the search of the van was constitutional, the admission of burglary evidence was proper, and the appeal from the denial of the new trial motion was untimely.
• United States v. Morales-Quinones
  812 F.2d 604· 10th Cir.· 1987-02-20 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to dismiss the indictment, admitting prior conviction evidence, admitting hearsay, or in its rulings on the witness's silence and credibility.
• United States v. Peterson
  808 F.2d 969· 2d Cir.· 1987-01-06 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the admission of the 'Williams check' evidence was an abuse of discretion because its probative value for knowledge and credibility was substantially outweighed by its potential for prejudice, and the error was not harmless.
• Patterson v. McLEAN Credit Union
  805 F.2d 1143· 4th Cir.· 1986-11-25 ·cited 26×
  Racial harassment claims are not cognizable under 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and the evidence was insufficient to support a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress under North Carolina law.
• United States v. Rengifo
  789 F.2d 975· 1st Cir.· 1986-05-06 ·cited 26×
  The court held that tape recordings and their transcripts, even in a foreign language, are admissible if properly authenticated and that sending transcripts to the jury room is permissible within the trial court's discretion, especially when the jury does not understand the langu
• Brown v. Darcy
  783 F.2d 1389· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-04 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting polygraph evidence and in refusing to instruct the jury that certain statements provided independent grounds for recovery.
• Shoppin' BAG OF Pueblo, Inc. v. Dillon Cos., Inc.
  783 F.2d 159· 10th Cir.· 1986-02-03 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the jury instructions adequately explained the elements of attempted monopolization, including the 'dangerous probability of success' and the definition of monopoly power, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding certain evidence.
• United States v. Leonor Guzman
  781 F.2d 428· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-27 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the admission of the waiver as a handwriting exemplar was not plain error, and the indictment was not multiplicitous.
• McLAURIN v. Josef E. Fischer
  768 F.2d 98· 6th Cir.· 1985-07-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court erred in directing a verdict on the due process claim because a reasonable juror could find a property interest existed, but properly limited evidence and did not abuse discretion in dismissing state law claims.
• United States v. Kuecker
  740 F.2d 496· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that evidence of a prior conviction for a crime involving dishonesty or false statement is admissible for impeachment purposes under Federal Rule of Evidence 609(a)(2) without a balancing of probative value against prejudicial effect, and that the jury instructions
• Petrucelli v. Coombe
  735 F.2d 684· 2d Cir.· 1984-05-18 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the petitioner failed to exhaust state remedies for his constitutional collateral estoppel claim regarding the Moresco evidence, as it was not clearly presented as a federal constitutional issue to the state courts.
• The Bohack Corp. v. Iowa Beef Processors, Inc.
  715 F.2d 703· 2d Cir.· 1983-08-02 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of Bohack's antitrust claims, finding the jury's verdict that IBP's price discrimination did not cause Bohack injury was supported by the evidence, and affirmed the dismissal of IBP's counterclaim as extinguished by Bohack's bankruptcy arrangement
• Anderson v. Malloy
  700 F.2d 1208· 8th Cir.· 1983-03-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in ruling that testimony regarding subsequent remedial measures did not raise the issue of feasibility, but rather concerned recommendations.
• United States v. Clifford
  704 F.2d 86· 3d Cir.· 1983-03-08 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in excluding cursive correspondence offered to show stylistic similarities, as the jury could make such comparisons without expert testimony.
• United States v. Leonard Ray Blanton (81-5644)
  700 F.2d 298· 6th Cir.· 1983-02-11 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the voir dire questioning was insufficient to ensure an impartial jury due to extensive pretrial publicity, violating defendants' constitutional rights.
• Savoie v. Otto Candies, Inc.
  692 F.2d 363· 5th Cir.· 1982-11-29 ·cited 26×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's findings that the plaintiff was a Jones Act seaman, that the admission of maintenance payments was not reversible error, and that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent.
• Haynes v. Am. Motors Corp. & Jeep Corp.
  691 F.2d 1268· 8th Cir.· 1982-11-03 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding evidence of television commercials, expert testimony on warnings, military jeep manuals, subsequent remedial measures, or federal standards, nor in its jury instructions.
• United States v. Franke Eugenio Martinez
  681 F.2d 1248· 10th Cir.· 1982-06-24 ·cited 26×
• Dente v. Riddell, Inc.
  664 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1981-09-25 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion under Federal Rule of Evidence 403 by admitting portions of the plaintiff's medical records, as the potential prejudice did not substantially outweigh the probative value.
• United States v. Hoppe
  645 F.2d 630· 8th Cir.· 1981-04-08 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the admission of evidence showing a witness's bias toward an informant was proper, and the destruction of the informant's notes did not violate due process.
• United States v. Thomas
  676 F.2d 239· 7th Cir.· 1980-07-24 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Thomas, Maddox, and Roberts on three counts of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2313, but reversed Robert White's conviction on Count II due to insufficient evidence of his involvement.
• United States v. Authement
  607 F.2d 1129· 5th Cir.· 1979-12-05 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the admission of photographs of the victim's injuries and the compelled production of brass knuckles from the defendant's attorney did not violate the defendant's rights.
• United States v. Grassi
  602 F.2d 1192· 5th Cir.· 1979-09-19 ·cited 26×
  The court held that while a stipulation can affect the Rule 403 balancing test, it does not automatically require exclusion of evidence, and trial courts retain discretion. The court affirmed the conviction, finding no reversible error in the admission of evidence or the prosecut
• United States v. Digeronimo
  598 F.2d 746· 2d Cir.· 1979-05-03 ·cited 26×
  Convictions for receiving and possessing stolen goods are multiplicitous with Hobbs Act robbery convictions when the possession is of the goods stolen in the robbery, and thus must be vacated. Other convictions are affirmed.
• United States v. Beacher Drell Roach
  590 F.2d 181· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-26 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the absence of counsel and a transcript at a preliminary hearing requires a remand to determine prejudice, and vacated a conviction based on Supreme Court precedent regarding multiple punishments for the same offense.
• United States v. Monty Edward Clayborne, Jr.
  584 F.2d 346· 10th Cir.· 1978-08-22 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the use of an electronic beeper to locate a clandestine laboratory, even without a warrant, was not a violation of the Fourth Amendment due to the minimal expectation of privacy in a commercial establishment. The court also found no double jeopardy violation a
• United States v. Miroyan
  577 F.2d 489· 9th Cir.· 1978-05-01 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the installation and monitoring of an electronic tracking device on an aircraft, with the owner's consent and while in public airspace, does not violate Fourth Amendment rights, and that probable cause existed for McGinnis' arrest and the subsequent search war
• United States v. Jacques Berenguer
  562 F.2d 206· 2d Cir.· 1977-09-22 ·cited 26×
  The court held that while the admission of testimony concerning currency seized following a warrantless arrest was error, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Krohn
  560 F.2d 293· 7th Cir.· 1977-08-12 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a violation of the Speedy Trial Act's interim limits does not warrant dismissal of the indictment, and evidence of other acts is admissible to show a common scheme or plan. Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and improper admission of evidence were als
• Irizarry v. State
  905 So. 2d 160· Fla. 3d DCA· 2005-02-09 ·cited 25×
  Dennis Irizarry appeals his convictions for kidnapping, burglary with assault or battery, aggravated battery with great bodily harm, and aggravated stalking arising from a violent attack on his former intimate partner. The appellate court affirmed all convictions, rejecting chall
• United States v. Castro
  887 F.2d 988· 9th Cir.· 1989-10-23 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit plain error by failing to give a specific unanimity instruction on the objects of the conspiracy, and that there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions. The court also found no abuse of discretion in denying severance
• United States v. Jenkins
  884 F.2d 433· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-30 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the district court improperly limited cross-examination regarding a witness's affidavit, but the error was harmless. The indictment was sufficiently specific, but the restitution condition on probation was unlawful. The conviction is affirmed, but the sentence
• Thomas "Jack" Fitzgerald v. McDANIEL
  833 F.2d 1516· 11th Cir.· 1987-12-15 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the reasonableness of a deputy sheriff's use of deadly force during an arrest is a question for the jury, and that the district court did not err in its application of notice statutes, sovereign immunity, or evidentiary rules.
• United States v. Durant
  730 F.2d 1180· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-29 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the evidence seized from the vehicle was admissible, the prosecutor's closing argument was not improper, and the evidence linking the defendant to the getaway car was admissible under the inevitable discovery exception.
• United States v. Sonntag
  684 F.2d 781· 11th Cir.· 1982-09-01 ·cited 25×
  The court held that evidence seized during a drug transaction at a defendant's home was admissible under consent search doctrine, searches of wallets incident to arrest were valid, the jury instructions on entrapment were sufficient, and evidentiary rulings were not an abuse of d
• Petrocelli v. Davis T. Gallison, M.D.
  679 F.2d 286· 1st Cir.· 1982-06-03 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding statements from a hospital record under the business records exception (Fed.R.Evid. 803(6)) because the source of the information was unclear and it was uncertain whether the statements constituted p
• Smithers v. State
  18 So. 3d 460· Fla.· 2009-07-09 ·cited 24×
  Samuel Smithers was convicted of two first-degree murders and sentenced to death. On postconviction relief and habeas appeal, Smithers challenged his convictions and sentences on grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of postco
• United States v. Boney
  977 F.2d 624· D.C. Cir.· 1992-10-13 ·cited 24×
  A felon juror's concealed status, discovered after a jury trial, requires reversal and a new trial because the juror's disqualification is not based on bias and cannot be adequately assessed post-trial.
• United States v. Anselmo Navarez and Paulin Valles-Rodriguez
  954 F.2d 1375· 7th Cir.· 1992-01-27 ·cited 24×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute, and that the admission of $34,000 found in a co-conspirator's apartment was not plain error. The court also affirmed the denial of a sentence redu
• United States v. Lopez
  944 F.2d 33· 1st Cir.· 1991-09-11 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in rejecting a plea agreement, refusing to recuse, limiting cross-examination, denying acquittal motions, or refusing a new trial, and that the sentencing decision was not reviewable.
• United States v. Moore
  936 F.2d 1508· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-19 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding an accomplice's statement, limiting cross-examination, or admitting palm print evidence, and that there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions.
• United States v. Walker
  930 F.2d 789· 10th Cir.· 1991-04-10 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in disallowing further interrogation of a witness for impeachment on a collateral matter, and that the defendant's possession of a firearm, involving the firing of the weapon, qualified as a crime of violence for
• United States v. Sellers
  926 F.2d 410· 5th Cir.· 1991-03-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding prior dumping was proper, the jury instructions regarding knowledge were not plain error, and the sentencing guidelines were correctly applied.
• United States v. Castiello
  915 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1990-09-12 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the agent's interpretation of the defendant's taped admission was admissible, the entrapment defense was not improperly forced, and the statute's notice deficiency did not violate due process as the defendant was not ha
• United States v. Pena
  897 F.2d 1075· 11th Cir.· 1990-04-02 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of Chitty's statements, though an error, was harmless, and that Pena failed to demonstrate prejudice from the joint trial or the jury instructions.
• United States v. Khorrami
  895 F.2d 1186· 7th Cir.· 1990-02-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for mailing threatening communications and that the admission of certain phone call tapes was proper.
• United States v. Myers
  892 F.2d 642· 7th Cir.· 1990-01-04 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the defendant may be entitled to a new trial due to ineffective assistance of counsel, specifically concerning the handling of a codefendant's statement and an eyewitness identification. The conviction was vacated and remanded for an evidentiary hearing.
• United States v. White
  890 F.2d 1012· 8th Cir.· 1989-11-28 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the drug convictions, finding no merit in the appellants' challenges regarding sentencing guidelines, drug courier profiles, illegal searches, government comments on silence, and denial of severance.
• United States v. Demarrias
  876 F.2d 674· 8th Cir.· 1989-06-06 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction over the offenses, that abusive sexual contact is a lesser included offense, that a magistrate could properly assist with jury deliberations, and that the evidentiary rulings were not plain error.
• United States v. Foley
  871 F.2d 235· 1st Cir.· 1989-04-04 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding portions of tape-recorded statements, in its Jencks Act ruling, or in admitting certain evidence, as the defendant failed to show prejudice in the bench trial.