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. Smith
  930 F.2d 1081· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-24 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the arrest warrant was valid, the warrantless search was constitutional based on third-party consent, the evidence was sufficient to prove constructive possession of firearms, and the defendant's claims of prosecutorial misconduct and sentencing errors were wi
• Davis v. Mason Cnty.
  927 F.2d 1473· 9th Cir.· 1991-03-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the sheriff is not the final policymaker for deputy training under Washington law, and the jury instructions on municipal liability did not meet the deliberate indifference standard required by Canton v. Harris.
• United States v. van Dorn
  925 F.2d 1331· 11th Cir.· 1991-03-11 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in restricting cross-examination of a government witness regarding his prior drug prosecution and alleged threats, nor in admitting testimony about a defendant's affiliation with the Gambino crime family and expe
• United States v. Millard P. Chambers
  918 F.2d 1455· 9th Cir.· 1990-11-20 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of possession with intent to distribute, and that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions, nor was there ineffective assistance of counsel or an abuse of discretion in admitting photographs
• United States v. Rodrigo Mejia
  909 F.2d 242· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-02 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Mejia, and that the trial court did not err in admitting certain testimony regarding secret compartments in a vehicle, a recent trip taken in that vehicle, a DEA surveillance tip, and a drug-sniffing dog's reaction to sei
• Doty v. Sewall
  908 F.2d 1053· 1st Cir.· 1990-07-17 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment on most issues, finding no abuse of discretion in evidentiary rulings or denial of a new trial, but reversed the denial of prejudgment interest on state law claims.
• United States v. Fozo
  904 F.2d 1166· 7th Cir.· 1990-06-14 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the sentencing departure for one defendant was reasonable.
• O'Dell v. Hercules Inc.
  904 F.2d 1194· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-10 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a new trial, affirming the jury's verdict for Hercules.
• United States v. Vance
  871 F.2d 572· 6th Cir.· 1989-04-04 ·cited 22×
  The court should not have admitted evidence of prior crimes to prove motive, as it constituted inadmissible propensity evidence and was unfairly prejudicial.
• United States v. Daniel Scott Gahagan (87-1991)
  865 F.2d 1490· 6th Cir.· 1989-01-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the search warrant's description, when supplemented by the affidavit and the executing officers' knowledge, was sufficiently particular to identify the premises to be searched, thus complying with the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Dietrich
  854 F.2d 1056· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-23 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not commit plain error by admitting a witness' polygraph testimony, a witness' prior inconsistent statement, or testimony about the defendant's daughter providing information, and therefore affirmed the conviction.
• United States v. Chenault
  844 F.2d 1124· 5th Cir.· 1988-04-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that statements made by the defendant to FBI agents were admissible as they were not obtained in violation of Miranda rights or involuntarily, and that extrinsic evidence of selling pallets was admissible to prove intent.
• United States v. Rivera-Medina
  845 F.2d 12· 1st Cir.· 1988-04-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the appellant of Hobbs Act violations and that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of other crimes or the witnesses' prior convictions.
• United States v. Mittleider
  835 F.2d 769· 10th Cir.· 1987-12-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the government sufficiently proved the defendant was a fugitive from justice and that the trial court did not err in admitting partially inaudible tape recordings, allowing jury transcripts, or giving a jury instruction on knowledge.
• United States v. Morris
  827 F.2d 1348· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting prior similar acts evidence, irrelevant evidence, or in denying a mistrial, and that the convictions and sentences were not multiplicitous or vindictive.
• United States v. Valentine
  820 F.2d 565· 2d Cir.· 1987-06-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the prosecutor's misrepresentation of grand jury testimony, which caused substantial prejudice to the defendant and deprived him of a fair trial, warranted reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. LaCHANCE
  817 F.2d 1491· 11th Cir.· 1987-06-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, the district court did not err in denying motions for severance, admitting evidence, or refusing hybrid representation.
• United States v. Cameron
  814 F.2d 403· 7th Cir.· 1987-03-10 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding evidence of a witness's drug use and misdemeanor conviction, nor in excluding evidence of a co-conspirator's flight, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction and the fine was permissible.
• United States v. Stallings
  810 F.2d 973· 10th Cir.· 1987-02-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that it had jurisdiction to hear the appeal despite incomplete sentencing because the lesser-included offenses would be automatically vacated. The court affirmed the convictions and sentences on the remaining counts.
• United States v. McBRIDE
  786 F.2d 45· 2d Cir.· 1986-03-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in excluding expert psychiatric testimony regarding the defendant's mental state, which was crucial for her defense of lacking culpable knowledge.
• United States v. Roark
  753 F.2d 991· 11th Cir.· 1985-02-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the exclusion of expert psychological testimony regarding the defendant's suggestibility was an error that affected substantial rights, requiring reversal.
• United States v. Cornell Byrd
  750 F.2d 585· 7th Cir.· 1984-12-10 ·cited 22×
  Communications between permanently separated spouses are not protected by the marital communications privilege, and evidence of other contemplated arsons is admissible if relevant to plan or intent.
• Brady v. Chem. Constr. Corp.
  740 F.2d 195· 2d Cir.· 1984-07-31 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the insurers' motion for a new trial, and that the appeal was frivolous, warranting sanctions.
• United States v. Faymore
  736 F.2d 328· 6th Cir.· 1984-06-06 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the imposition of consecutive sentences for multiple drug offenses did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause, and that the trial court's jury instructions and evidentiary rulings were proper.
• United States v. McCOLLUM
  732 F.2d 1419· 9th Cir.· 1984-05-08 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge argues that the trial court erred in admitting a prior conviction under Rule 609 and that this error was not harmless, as the majority found.
• Constantina Szeliga v. Gen. Motors Corp.
  728 F.2d 566· 1st Cir.· 1984-03-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing two films illustrating an expert's theory to be shown to the jury, as their probative value was not substantially outweighed by prejudice or unfair surprise.
• United States v. Gutman
  725 F.2d 417· 7th Cir.· 1984-01-10 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the conviction, finding that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the defendant's motions for a competency hearing, a psychiatric examination of a key government witness, and to strike the witness's testimony. The dissent argues that
• United States v. Pizarro
  717 F.2d 336· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the government was not responsible for the informant's disappearance and made reasonable efforts to locate him, and that the trial court did not err in its rulings regarding the informant's unavailability or cross-examination.
• Howard F. and Mildred E. Keogh v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  713 F.2d 496· 9th Cir.· 1983-08-17 ·cited 22×
  The tax court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a casino dealer's personal diary as a business record exception to hearsay, nor did it err in determining income tax deficiencies based on a statistical analysis of that diary.
• Paulino Izaguirre Rojas v. Richardson
  703 F.2d 186· 5th Cir.· 1983-04-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that defense counsel's reference to the plaintiff as an "illegal alien" during closing arguments constituted plain error, prejudicing the jury and affecting substantial rights, thus warranting a new trial.
• United States v. Hoyle Wayne Whitaker
  702 F.2d 901· 11th Cir.· 1983-04-11 ·cited 22×
  The court held that collateral estoppel barred the government from relitigating issues of ultimate fact necessarily determined by a prior jury's acquittal, but not all suppressed testimony met this standard.
• United States v. Levino Michelena-Orovio
  702 F.2d 496· 5th Cir.· 1983-03-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the importation of a large quantity of marijuana, coupled with other circumstances, is sufficient to infer a defendant's knowing participation in a conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Clemons
  676 F.2d 122· 5th Cir.· 1982-05-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that evidence of a second drug transaction, including the defendant's statement, was admissible to prove identity and was not substantially outweighed by prejudice.
• Gardner v. S. Ry. Sys.
  675 F.2d 949· 7th Cir.· 1982-04-22 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the exclusion of prior accident evidence and the amendment of the answer, but reversed and remanded the denial of costs.
• Ok Nyo Rexrode v. Am. Laundry Press Co.
  674 F.2d 826· 10th Cir.· 1982-03-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of other accidents, excluding the 1972 ANSI standard, or in its jury instructions, and that sufficient evidence supported the verdict.
• United States v. Kibler
  667 F.2d 452· 4th Cir.· 1982-01-08 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge believes venue for the substantive offense lay solely in the District of Columbia, making the trial in Maryland reversible error.
• KIM v. Coppin State Coll.
  662 F.2d 1055· 4th Cir.· 1981-10-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting a directed verdict on the compensation issue, particularly concerning the First Amendment claim, and remanded for a new trial on that issue, while affirming the directed verdict on promotion and working conditions.
• LeSUEUR Creamery, Inc. v. Haskon, Inc.
  660 F.2d 342· 8th Cir.· 1981-09-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a jury's negligence verdict can be sustained even with other claims, and that damages must be reduced by the plaintiff's percentage of contributory negligence as required by statute.
• United States v. Mack
  643 F.2d 1119· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that evidence of a subsequent drug sale was admissible to rebut an entrapment defense, and prosecutorial remarks, while inappropriate, were harmless error.
• United States v. DeJOHN
  638 F.2d 1048· 7th Cir.· 1981-01-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the admission of 'bad acts' evidence, limitations on cross-examination, denial of a motion for acquittal, refusal of certain jury instructions, and the sentencing structure did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Avance R. Allen
  629 F.2d 51· D.C. Cir.· 1980-05-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the arresting officer lacked probable cause to arrest the appellant for drinking in public because he failed to conduct a minimal inquiry into whether drinking was permitted at the establishment.
• United States v. Louin Ray Bright and Edward Lee Whitten
  588 F.2d 504· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the mail fraud convictions and that the district court did not err in its supplemental jury instructions or in allowing cross-examination of a character witness.
• Keen v. Detroit Diesel Allison and Detroit Diesel Engine
  569 F.2d 547· 10th Cir.· 1978-04-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the erroneous admission of unanswered discovery requests, presented to the jury as deemed admitted, was not harmless error and required reversal.
• United States v. Gubelman
  571 F.2d 1252· 2d Cir.· 1978-02-24 ·cited 22×
  Evidence of prior similar acts is inadmissible to prove identity unless the acts share unique, distinguishing characteristics, not just general similarity.
• United States v. Sellers
  566 F.2d 884· 4th Cir.· 1977-11-30 ·cited 22×
  A judge must disqualify himself if his impartiality might reasonably be questioned, even if the victim is not a party and the judge has no direct financial interest in a party.
• United States v. Stumes
  549 F.2d 831· 8th Cir.· 1977-02-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the warrantless seizure of a typewriter from a prisoner's cell was permissible due to diminished expectations of privacy and that reference to the prisoner's prior murder trial was admissible.
• United States v. Harvey
  547 F.2d 720· 2d Cir.· 1976-11-24 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court erred in excluding extrinsic evidence of a key government witness's potential bias, as such evidence is not collateral and is admissible to impeach credibility.
• Jewel Grier v. State
  27 So. 3d 97· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-12-23 ·cited 21×
  Grier was convicted of sexual abuse charges involving a teenage victim. On appeal, he challenged the trial court's admission of "Williams rule" testimony from two other alleged victims, arguing the similar fact evidence was unduly prejudicial. The Fourth District affirmed, holdin
• State v. Rusti H. Osvath
  661 So. 2d 1252· Fla. 3d DCA· 1995-10-25 ·cited 21×
  The circuit court departed from essential requirements of law by reversing convictions on grounds not raised by the respondent.
• Foley v. City OF Lowell
  948 F.2d 10· 1st Cir.· 1991-10-23 ·cited 21×
  The court held that evidence of subsequent police misconduct is admissible to prove a prior municipal policy of indifference, and that prejudgment interest should run until the date of final judgment.