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. Sacerio
  952 F.2d 860· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants knowingly possessed cocaine with intent to distribute or voluntarily participated in a conspiracy to do so.
• United States v. Brown
  948 F.2d 1076· 8th Cir.· 1991-11-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of the appellant's physical condition and state of mind after his last VA exam was admissible and relevant to proving his intent and motive to defraud the VA.
• United States v. Mark
  943 F.2d 444· 4th Cir.· 1991-08-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting extrinsic act evidence under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) and that the determination of relevant conduct for sentencing purposes was not clearly erroneous.
• United States v. Alphonso Martinez
  937 F.2d 299· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdicts for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and that the admission of certain testimony and prosecutorial comments did not constitute plain error.
• United States v. Columbus Ewings
  936 F.2d 903· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of the defendant's spending of insurance proceeds was admissible to show his participation in the fraud, and that the district court had discretion to impose consecutive sentences for pre-guidelines and guidelines counts.
• United States v. Bennie Johnson
  934 F.2d 936· 8th Cir.· 1991-05-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of subsequent drug transactions under Rule 404(b) and testimony regarding Frank Noel as background information, and that these did not constructively amend the indictment.
• United States v. Sacco
  927 F.2d 726· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the conspiracy conviction must be reversed because the underlying scheme did not involve 'property' as defined by mail and wire fraud statutes, but affirmed the perjury convictions, finding the evidence admissible and the testimony material.
• Seidman v. Am. Airlines, Inc.
  923 F.2d 1134· 5th Cir.· 1991-02-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, but it did err in not reducing the damage award sufficiently, requiring a further remittitur.
• Clarksville-Montgomery Cnty. Sch. Sys. v. United States Gypsum Co.
  925 F.2d 993· 6th Cir.· 1991-01-10 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• Selver v. State
  568 So. 2d 1331· Fla. 4th DCA· 1990-10-31 ·cited 10×
  Selver was convicted of first-degree murder in the killing of Clinton Gibbs during a drug deal gone wrong. The Fourth District reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court erred in admitting collateral crime evidence regarding the defendant's prior drug dea
• United States v. James B. Frost (89-5144/5145) & Charles L. Griffin (89-5146/5147)
  914 F.2d 756· 6th Cir.· 1990-09-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendants' convictions for conspiracy, bribery, and misapplication of bank funds, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its rulings.
• United States v. Sullivan
  911 F.2d 2· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting certain testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict on all counts.
• United States v. Moskowitz
  888 F.2d 223· 2d Cir.· 1989-10-13 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions for transporting hazardous materials and possessing cocaine but remanded for resentencing due to a lesser-included offense issue.
• United States v. Miller
  883 F.2d 1540· 11th Cir.· 1989-09-25 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting extrinsic evidence of a prior drug sale to show identity, modus operandi, or intent, and alternatively, that any error was harmless.
• Leboeuf v. K-Mart Corp.
  888 F.2d 330· 5th Cir.· 1989-07-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury verdict, evidentiary rulings, and special verdict questions were not erroneous, affirming the district court's judgment.
• Lesko v. Owens
  881 F.2d 44· 3d Cir.· 1989-07-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of gruesome details of a prior murder was unduly prejudicial and violated the defendant's right to a fair trial. Additionally, the court found that a potential plea agreement violation raised serious due process concerns.
• Williams v. Chevron U.S.A., Inc.
  875 F.2d 501· 5th Cir.· 1989-06-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding of liability against Chevron, the award for pain and suffering was excessive and would be reduced or subject to a new trial.
• United States v. Antwine
  873 F.2d 1144· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the handgun was admissible evidence, the jury verdict was unanimous, and the defendant's speedy trial rights were not violated.
• Vincent v. Louis Marx & Co., Inc.
  874 F.2d 36· 1st Cir.· 1989-05-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred by admitting a prior inconsistent pleading without exercising its discretion under Fed.R.Evid. 403 to balance probative value against prejudice, and that this error was not harmless. The court also held that the exclusion of the settle
• United States v. Hays
  872 F.2d 582· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in admitting a substantial amount of irrelevant, cumulative, and prejudicial evidence, which impermissibly affected the substantial rights of the defendants.
• United States v. Dakins
  872 F.2d 1061· D.C. Cir.· 1989-04-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in excluding evidence of police misconduct, accepting a partial jury verdict, or refusing to apply the rule of consistency.
• United States v. Ahmad Afjehei
  869 F.2d 670· 2d Cir.· 1989-03-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of the defendant's prior international trips was improperly admitted under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) because it was not sufficiently similar to the charged offense to prove knowledge and was unduly prejudicial.
• United States v. Ball
  868 F.2d 984· 8th Cir.· 1989-02-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the appellant's post-arrest statements as they were relevant to proving intent and completing the narrative of the offense.
• United States v. Don Temple
  862 F.2d 821· 10th Cir.· 1988-12-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of two 1986 incidents under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) because they were too remote and tenuous to prove the defendant's intent or common plan for the 1987 conspiracy, and their prejudicial ef
• United States v. Bowen
  857 F.2d 1337· 9th Cir.· 1988-09-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding polygraph-related evidence because its potential for unfair prejudice substantially outweighed its probative value, especially given the government's inconsistent representations about its use.
• Vaughn v. Willis
  853 F.2d 1372· 7th Cir.· 1988-07-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting an unavailable witness' deposition and excluding an impeaching letter, and that any error in jury instructions was harmless.
• Anne Needham v. White Labs., Inc.
  847 F.2d 355· 7th Cir.· 1988-05-16 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge argues that the jury instructions were flawed, allowing a finding of negligence based on harm to the mother rather than the plaintiff, and that the majority incorrectly applied precedent regarding foreseeability and transferred negligence.
• Donald v. Sheriff Wilson
  847 F.2d 1191· 6th Cir.· 1988-05-16 ·cited 10×
  Federal Rule of Evidence 403 cannot be used to limit the introduction of past criminal convictions for impeachment purposes in a civil trial, as Rule 609 exclusively governs this issue.
• United States v. Cosentino
  844 F.2d 30· 2d Cir.· 1988-04-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the full text of witness cooperation agreements may be admitted during direct examination when the defense's opening statement has sufficiently attacked the witnesses' credibility, thereby making the bolstering aspects of the agreements admissible for rehabili
• Faison v. Nationwide Mortg. Corp.
  839 F.2d 680· D.C. Cir.· 1988-03-04 ·cited 10×
  The court granted rehearing on the issue of excessive compensatory damages, denying other issues, and remanded the cases to the trial court for evaluation of the excessive verdict claim.
• United States v. DeVORE
  839 F.2d 1330· 8th Cir.· 1988-02-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the prosecutor's comments on the defendant's inconsistent alibis were permissible as they attacked the inconsistency rather than silence, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of past crimes or in its handling of a co-d
• Romine v. Parman
  831 F.2d 944· 10th Cir.· 1987-10-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of the driver drinking beer and paying a traffic fine, as the probative value was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.
• United States v. Taggatz
  831 F.2d 1355· 7th Cir.· 1987-10-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior similar scheme, that the jury instructions and verdict were proper, and that the sentence imposed was not excessive.
• Wolfel v. Holbrook
  823 F.2d 970· 6th Cir.· 1987-07-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that admitting evidence of a prisoner's willingness to submit to an inconclusive polygraph examination, and interrogating another witness about their refusal to take one, was improper and prejudicial.
• United States v. Holmes
  822 F.2d 802· 8th Cir.· 1987-07-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting prior felony convictions over ten years old for impeachment and in admitting exhibits explaining the defendant's continued incarceration.
• United States v. Ferreira
  821 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1987-06-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the stop and frisk of the defendant was constitutionally permissible, but the admission of evidence of firearms seized from the defendant was an abuse of discretion because the weapons were irrelevant to the unarmed bank robbery charge and unfairly prejudicial
• United States v. Henthorn
  815 F.2d 304· 5th Cir.· 1987-04-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the government's use of a paid informant did not violate due process, and the admission of extrinsic offense evidence against one defendant was proper and did not warrant severance for the other. The limitations on voir dire were also upheld.
• Gates v. Shell OIL (Shell Offshore
  812 F.2d 1509· 5th Cir.· 1987-03-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury's verdict was not supported by sufficient evidence, warranting a new trial, but that the evidence could support a finding of negligence, thus reversing the judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• Union Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Chrysler Corp.
  793 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1986-03-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that CSA's arguments for a new trial and the inadmissibility of the Janowski letter were unavailing, and that Chrysler's claim for implied contractual indemnity against CSA failed.
• Herber v. Johns-Manville Corp.
  785 F.2d 79· 3d Cir.· 1986-03-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that New Jersey law allows recovery for future medical monitoring and emotional distress due to fear of cancer, but not for the increased risk of cancer itself without proof of probable future illness. The jury's finding of liability and zero damages was upheld.
• Murphy v. The Cincinnati Ins. Co.
  772 F.2d 273· 6th Cir.· 1985-09-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that attorney fees are recoverable damages for an insurer's breach of its implied contractual duty to act in good faith in investigating and paying a claim, and that testimony regarding an insured's willingness to submit to a polygraph examination is admissible if
• United States v. Wolfe
  766 F.2d 1525· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motions, as the evidence was sufficient, the co-conspirator statements were admissible, and the prior conviction evidence was properly handled.
• United States v. McDOWELL
  762 F.2d 1072· D.C. Cir.· 1985-05-31 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a bulletproof vest found in a drug dealer's apartment was admissible evidence to show intent to distribute, as its probative value was not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.
• Bower v. O'Hara
  759 F.2d 1117· 3d Cir.· 1985-04-17 ·cited 10×
  A guilty plea can have preclusive effect in subsequent civil litigation, estopping a party from contesting facts essential to the offense.
• Ford B. Ford v. Sharp
  758 F.2d 1018· 5th Cir.· 1985-03-26 ·cited 10×
  The Fair Labor Standards Act applies to employers with two employees, even if they do not work simultaneously, and a willful violation extends the statute of limitations to three years. Evidence for employees named in the pretrial order but not the complaint can be admitted, but
• ALL Am. Life & Cas. Co. v. Oceanic Trade Alliance Council Int'l, Inc.
  756 F.2d 474· 6th Cir.· 1985-03-08 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding certain evidence and that the claim was reasonably in dispute, thus precluding penalty interest.
• United States v. Petrov
  747 F.2d 824· 2d Cir.· 1984-10-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that expert testimony is not required to establish the prurient appeal of photographs depicting bestiality, and affirmed convictions on counts 7 and 9.
• United States v. Posner
  594 F. Supp. 930· S.D. Fla.· 1984-09-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the press has a First Amendment right to inspect and copy tax returns admitted into evidence in a criminal trial, which outweighs the defendant's asserted privacy and fair trial interests when the information is already part of the public record.
• Zimmer v. Miller Trucking Co., Inc.
  743 F.2d 601· 8th Cir.· 1984-09-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding Officer Baudler's opinion testimony, but erred in finding Crestwell negligent as a matter of law for parking on the shoulder.
• Meyers v. Union Pac. R.R. Co.
  738 F.2d 328· 8th Cir.· 1984-07-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury instructions on contributory negligence and the admission of evidence regarding prior injuries were not erroneous and did not prejudice the plaintiff.