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. Benson
  941 F.2d 598· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-27 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the admission of the government's expert witness testimony regarding the analysis of the transaction and its tax consequences was not manifestly erroneous. The dissent also disagreed with the majority's rejection of the harmless error doctrine.
• United States v. Perkins
  937 F.2d 1397· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-01 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its evidentiary rulings, and while an instruction on change of appearance was improper, it constituted harmless error. Therefore, the conviction is affirmed.
• Lewis v. Kendrick
  944 F.2d 949· 1st Cir.· 1991-04-26 ·cited 21×
  An unreasonably high fee demand by a plaintiff's attorney does not automatically forfeit the plaintiff's right to any fee award.
• Pittsley v. Sergeant Philip Warish
  927 F.2d 3· 1st Cir.· 1991-02-27 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the police officers' actions and statements, while potentially wrongful, did not rise to the level of a constitutional violation actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and therefore, the directed verdicts for the defendants were appropriate.
• United States v. Bland
  908 F.2d 471· 9th Cir.· 1990-07-11 ·cited 21×
  The court held that revealing the specific, inflammatory details underlying an arrest warrant to the jury venire was an abuse of discretion and deprived the defendant of a fair trial, and that the defendant's confession was inadmissible due to an incomplete Miranda warning.
• United States v. Martin
  897 F.2d 1368· 6th Cir.· 1990-03-01 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the admission of hearsay testimony regarding the defendant's prior criminal acts was improper and violated the Confrontation Clause, and that this error was not harmless.
• United States v. Onel Colon
  880 F.2d 650· 2d Cir.· 1989-07-14 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court erred in admitting evidence of prior similar acts because the defendant's defense theory, asserting a lack of recollection of the event, removed the issue of intent from dispute.
• United States v. Comerford
  857 F.2d 1323· 9th Cir.· 1988-09-21 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the appellant waived his objection to the sufficiency of the evidence by failing to renew his motion for judgment of acquittal, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence of the victim's subsequent battery.
• United States v. Thomas
  768 F.2d 611· 5th Cir.· 1985-08-01 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conspiracy conviction, the jury instructions on entrapment and conflicting theories were proper, and the exclusion of polygraph examiner testimony was correct.
• United States v. Hoelker
  765 F.2d 1422· 9th Cir.· 1985-07-17 ·cited 21×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the Hobbs Act charges were properly brought, severance was not required, evidence was admissible, prosecutorial comments were permissible, and double jeopardy did not bar the substantive charges.
• United States v. Gracia
  755 F.2d 984· 2d Cir.· 1985-02-14 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the criminal contempt statute (18 U.S.C. § 401) is constitutional, and affirmed the convictions of all three defendants, but reduced Sanchez's sentence due to proportionality concerns.
• United States v. Lyons
  731 F.2d 243· 5th Cir.· 1984-04-16 ·cited 21×
  The court should have permitted the defendant to submit his insanity defense to the jury.
• Noel Shows, Inc. v. United States
  721 F.2d 327· 11th Cir.· 1983-12-12 ·cited 21×
  The trial court's sustaining of a government objection, made in violation of its own court-approved stipulation, compels reversal.
• United States v. White
  671 F.2d 1126· 8th Cir.· 1982-02-26 ·cited 21×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in limiting cross-examination, admitting personal tax returns, or in its jury instructions, and that the statute of limitations did not bar the charges.
• United States v. Marino
  617 F.2d 76· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-12 ·cited 21×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence or denying severance.
• Household Goods Carriers' Bureau v. Terrell
  417 F.2d 47· 5th Cir.· 1969-09-12 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the trial court erred in allowing the jury to consider the "false" portions of the Wyche letter as a basis for damages, as those issues had been settled in a prior libel suit, requiring a new trial against the Bureau. The court affirmed the judgment notwithsta
• United States v. Dontiez Pendergrass
  995 F.3d 858· 11th Cir.· 2021-04-22 ·cited 20×
  Dontiez Pendergrass was convicted of five counts of armed robbery and related firearm charges after law enforcement identified him as the perpetrator of a series of robberies in Georgia through distinctive patterns of evidence, including surveillance videos showing a left-handed
• United States v. Lasanta
  978 F.2d 1300· 2d Cir.· 1992-10-21 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the warrantless seizure of a vehicle for civil forfeiture, without probable cause or a warrant, violates the Fourth Amendment, but the admission of evidence derived from such seizure can be harmless error. The court also held that evidence of prior drug transa
• United States v. Curry
  977 F.2d 1042· 7th Cir.· 1992-09-24 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the joinder of perjury counts with conspiracy counts was proper under Rule 8(b) and that the exclusion of expert testimony on eyewitness identification was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Eisen
  974 F.2d 246· 2d Cir.· 1992-08-17 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the RICO convictions, holding that a scheme to defraud civil litigants of money through mail fraud and witness bribery constitutes racketeering activity under RICO, and that the definition of 'witness' under New York Penal Law § 215.00 includes individuals paid
• United States v. Sitton
  968 F.2d 947· 9th Cir.· 1992-07-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of simple possession for Dewbre and Sitton. The court also affirmed other convictions and evidentiary rulings.
• Myron Durtsche, Jr. v. Am. Colloid Co.
  958 F.2d 1007· 10th Cir.· 1992-03-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that amendments to an employee handbook attempting to reinstate at-will employment were ineffective as a matter of law because they were not conspicuous. The court also affirmed the admission of evidence regarding future damages and groundwater contamination.
• Susanne Littlefield v. McGUFFEY
  954 F.2d 1337· 7th Cir.· 1992-01-27 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the defendant's evidentiary and jury instruction challenges lacked merit, and that the award of damages and attorney's fees was supported by the evidence and applicable law.
• Travers v. State
  578 So. 2d 793· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-04-18 ·cited 20×
  Robert Travers appeals his conviction for sexual battery and lewd and lascivious assault on a child under twelve, raising multiple trial errors including denial of a motion for acquittal, prosecutorial misconduct, trial court interference, and improper jury instructions. The appe
• United States v. REY
  923 F.2d 1217· 6th Cir.· 1991-01-22 ·cited 20×
  The court concurred that evidence seized under a warrant, though potentially overbroad in scope, was admissible under the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule.
• United States v. Simmons
  923 F.2d 934· 2d Cir.· 1991-01-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the admission of unredacted grand jury testimony during deliberations, while potentially a Sixth Amendment violation, was harmless error because the testimony was cumulative and the defendant's credibility was extensively attacked. The court also affirmed the
• C.A. Assocs. v. DOW Chem. Co.
  918 F.2d 1485· 10th Cir.· 1990-11-16 ·cited 20×
  The appellate court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting the admissibility of evidence concerning other buildings under Federal Rule of Evidence 403, balancing probative value against the risk of unfair prejudice, confusion, and delay.
• United States v. Boise
  916 F.2d 497· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-29 ·cited 20×
  The court should reverse the conviction because the evidence is insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Hoffert v. State
  559 So. 2d 1246· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-04-11 ·cited 20×
  Donald Hoffert appeals his second-degree murder conviction for fatally shooting Peter Sullivan during an apartment complex dispute. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the sufficiency of evidence for conviction but reversed and remanded due to a misleading jury instructi
• Garland Melton v. Deere & Co.
  887 F.2d 1241· 5th Cir.· 1989-10-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the danger of the combine's unloader auger was open and obvious as a matter of law, precluding strict liability.
• United States v. Tejada
  886 F.2d 483· 1st Cir.· 1989-10-04 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting testimony about a drug ledger, excluding impeachment testimony, allowing testimony in Spanish with an interpreter, and denying a motion to merge possession and distribution counts.
• United States v. Marroquin
  885 F.2d 1240· 5th Cir.· 1989-09-27 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the exclusions in section 3161(h) of the Speedy Trial Act do not apply to the thirty-day period in section 3161(c)(2), and that other claims regarding double jeopardy, jury instructions, evidence admissibility, and sufficiency of evidence were meritless.
• United States v. Blandina
  895 F.2d 293· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motions related to the Speedy Trial Act, continuances, and evidentiary rulings, and that sufficient evidence supported the tax evasion conviction.
• United States v. Provost
  875 F.2d 172· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in appointing an expert witness, admitting certain testimony under the medical records exception, or excluding evidence offered for impeachment, and that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict.
• United States v. Kelley
  864 F.2d 569· 7th Cir.· 1989-01-10 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the district court properly refused a good faith reliance on counsel instruction because the jury instructions on willfulness adequately encompassed the defense, and that the statute of limitations did not bar the charges.
• United States v. Kinslow
  860 F.2d 963· 9th Cir.· 1988-11-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in imposing a 25-year parole ineligibility period for consecutive life sentences, as it exceeded the statutory limit for a life sentence, but affirmed the conviction.
• Lucien Sherrod v. Berry
  856 F.2d 802· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-22 ·cited 20×
• Lane M. McGONIGAL v. Gearhart Indus., Inc.
  851 F.2d 774· 5th Cir.· 1988-08-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the government contractor defense does not apply to defective manufacture, the admission of certain evidence was harmless error, res ipsa loquitur was properly submitted, and the jury instructions were not misleading.
• Conklin v. Lovely
  834 F.2d 543· 6th Cir.· 1987-12-03 ·cited 20×
• United States v. Unruh
  855 F.2d 1363· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-03 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the jury instruction on intent to injure or defraud was potentially misleading, and that the failure to instruct on the defense of board consent or good faith constituted reversible error for certain counts, requiring remand.
• Dula McCARTY v. Pheasant RUN, Inc.
  826 F.2d 1554· 7th Cir.· 1987-07-22 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict for the defendant, holding that the plaintiff failed to preserve her right to judgment notwithstanding the verdict and that the trial court did not err in excluding evidence or in its jury instructions.
• United States v. Enver Calbas
  821 F.2d 887· 2d Cir.· 1987-06-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the jury's consideration of extra-record information did not prejudice the defendant, and that the trial court did not err in its handling of the inquiry into the matter.
• Woodruff v. Lane
  818 F.2d 1369· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-18 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of other home invasions for modus operandi, the sufficiency of the evidence, and prosecutorial misconduct did not rise to the level of constitutional error denying a fair trial.
• United States v. Gonzalez
  810 F.2d 1538· 11th Cir.· 1987-02-26 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy and possession of marijuana, holding that the evidence was sufficient to establish a stateless vessel, territorial nexus, and conspiracy, and that separate punishments for two conspiracy counts did not violate double jeopardy.
• Bannister v. Town OF Noble
  812 F.2d 1265· 10th Cir.· 1987-02-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting videotapes, submitting proximate cause to the jury, or in its jury instructions, and that there was no reversible error regarding character evidence or attorney misconduct.
• United States v. Shorter
  809 F.2d 54· D.C. Cir.· 1987-01-16 ·cited 20×
  The court held that tax evasion over multiple years can be charged as a single offense if part of a continuing scheme, and that expert testimony on pathological gambling was properly excluded as irrelevant or unnecessary.
• United States v. Caputo
  808 F.2d 963· 2d Cir.· 1987-01-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that credit card account numbers printed on restaurant checks qualify as 'access devices' under 18 U.S.C. § 1029, and that the failure to file a motion to suppress evidence found in trash was not ineffective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Galyen
  798 F.2d 331· 8th Cir.· 1986-08-13 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the admission of prior bad acts evidence was proper under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict.
• Scott v. Sears
  789 F.2d 1052· 4th Cir.· 1986-05-01 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while some of the expert testimony was admissible under federal rules, other portions were unduly prejudicial and should have been excluded under Rule 403, requiring a new trial.
• United States v. Pollard
  778 F.2d 1177· 6th Cir.· 1985-12-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting tape recordings of subsequent conversations as evidence of intent and knowledge, that sufficient evidence supported the convictions, and that the Bail Reform Act of 1984 is constitutional.