Federal Rule Of Evidence 403

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

• Clinkscale v. United States
  729 F.2d 940· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish willfulness for filing false tax returns and that the admission of certain testimony was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Gigante
  729 F.2d 78· 2d Cir.· 1984-02-21 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a mistrial due to prejudicial publicity, nor in its evidentiary rulings or handling of an improper prosecutorial question.
• United States v. O'Shea
  724 F.2d 1514· 11th Cir.· 1984-02-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing the defendant's proffered stipulation regarding his prior felony conviction.
• United States v. Homero Sepulveda
  710 F.2d 188· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of a heroin transaction was admissible in a cocaine conspiracy trial because it was inextricably intertwined and not extrinsic evidence, and any prejudice was cured by a limiting instruction.
• United States v. Abel
  707 F.2d 1013· 9th Cir.· 1983-05-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of a witness's membership in a prison gang, sworn to lie, is admissible to show bias and impeach credibility.
• United States v. Walker
  706 F.2d 28· 1st Cir.· 1983-05-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for severance or in ruling that the defendant lacked standing to challenge evidence seized from a co-defendant's residence.
• United States v. Syroos Mortazavi
  702 F.2d 526· 5th Cir.· 1983-03-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of a prior extrinsic offense was proper for impeachment and to prove intent, and that there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions.
• United States v. Johnson
  697 F.2d 735· 6th Cir.· 1983-01-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of prior act evidence was permissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to prove intent, and that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in balancing probative value against prejudice. However, the collateral estoppel issue required further
• United States v. J. A. "Bob" Wilkes
  685 F.2d 135· 5th Cir.· 1982-08-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of extrinsic evidence of prior collection practices was proper under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) because intent was a contested element of the offense and the evidence was relevant and not unduly prejudicial.
• United States v. Pomerantz
  683 F.2d 352· 11th Cir.· 1982-08-16 ·cited 10×
  The admission of testimony regarding the defendant possessing a gun during the commission of the crime was not reversible error, and the evidence was sufficient to support the conspiracy charge.
• Daskarolis v. The Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
  651 F.2d 937· 4th Cir.· 1981-06-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the exclusion of the exemplar tire was not reversible error because it did not affect the substantial rights of the parties, and the trial judge's decision to exclude it was within his discretion.
• United States v. TOM
  640 F.2d 1037· 9th Cir.· 1981-03-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that admitting evidence of a prior drug conviction to impeach a defense witness's testimony about the defendant's lack of drug dealing was not an abuse of discretion, and the jury instruction on entrapment, when read as a whole, did not constitute plain error.
• United States v. Payne
  635 F.2d 643· 7th Cir.· 1980-12-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the statute of limitations did not bar prosecution as the conspiracy involved a continuing relationship, and that the transportation of severed vehicle parts across state lines violates the Dyer Act. The court also affirmed the trial court's rulings on right t
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Carino
  631 F.2d 226· 3d Cir.· 1980-08-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the exclusion of evidence of the victim's prior manslaughter conviction to show the defendant's state of mind was an error, it was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Scuito
  623 F.2d 869· 3d Cir.· 1980-06-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in denying the defendant's motion to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds, nor did he abuse his discretion in denying the motion for a psychiatric examination of the complainant.
• United States v. Williams
  613 F.2d 560· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-12 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on entrapment, evidence exclusion, search and seizure standing, or due process regarding expert analysis.
• United States v. Cassasa
  588 F.2d 282· 9th Cir.· 1978-12-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge's prior remarks did not warrant disqualification, the exclusion of composite pictures was not an abuse of discretion, and communications with the jury were harmless error. The court also found that the jury instructions and the handling of jury
• Gov't OF the Virgin Islands v. Felix
  569 F.2d 1274· 3d Cir.· 1978-01-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its voir dire, evidentiary rulings, or denial of psychiatric examinations, and that sufficient evidence supported the murder conviction.
• Ioannis Alexopoulos
  2006 WL 3026236· Del. Super. Ct.· 2016-04-22 ·cited 9×
  The Court affirmed the judgment of conviction for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) and dismissed the appeal of the improper lane change conviction. The Court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the appellant's motion for a mistrial after a witness m
• Thompson v. State
  76 So. 3d 1050· Fla. 1st DCA· 2011-12-20 ·cited 9×
  Thompson was convicted of manslaughter, attempted second degree murder, firearm possession by a felon, and shooting into an occupied dwelling following a shooting that killed Steven Weed and injured Lizia Hardy-Batt. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, find
• Pratt v. State
  1 So. 3d 1169· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-01-28 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the trial court erred in admitting prior bad acts evidence because it only demonstrated propensity and was not relevant to any contested issue.
• Armalin v. State
  884 So. 2d 458· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-10-06 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding general drug dealer behavior, while potentially inadmissible, constituted harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt.
• Armesto v. Fla. State Univ. Coll. of Law Dean Donald Weidner
  615 So. 2d 707· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-12-15 ·cited 9×
  Rosa Armesto, a law student at Florida State University College of Law, appealed her suspension for cheating on a final examination. The court affirmed the hearing panel's finding that she cheated, holding that FSU followed all applicable procedural rules and that substantial evi
• Raymond v. The Raymond Corp.
  938 F.2d 1518· 1st Cir.· 1991-07-29 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the jury's verdict was supported by the evidence and that the district court did not err in denying the plaintiff's motions for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial.
• United States v. Helder C. Simas
  937 F.2d 459· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-27 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing an entrapment instruction, that the jury instructions for mail fraud were adequate, and that the bribery counts were properly brought under 18 U.S.C. § 666 without requiring tracing of federal funds.
• Morley v. Cohen
  888 F.2d 1006· 4th Cir.· 1989-10-30 ·cited 9×
  The court held that a settlement with a codefendant must reduce the judgment against the remaining defendant, and that attorneys' fees requests in RICO actions are not subject to the ten-day limit of Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e).
• Crossley v. Lieberman
  868 F.2d 566· 3d Cir.· 1989-02-16 ·cited 9×
  An attorney who regularly engages in debt collection activities is considered a debt collector under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and threatening legal action that cannot legally be taken within a short timeframe violates the Act.
• Sprankle v. Bower Ammonia & Chem. Co.
  824 F.2d 409· 5th Cir.· 1987-08-18 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on negligent failure to warn and strict liability for abnormally dangerous activity, and that the exclusion of OSHA regulations was harmless error.
• Hopkins v. Britton
  742 F.2d 1308· 11th Cir.· 1984-09-27 ·cited 9×
  The court held that prison officials were not deliberately indifferent to the inmate's serious medical needs and had no reason to know of the specific danger posed to him by other inmates.
• United States v. McKINNEY
  707 F.2d 381· 9th Cir.· 1983-05-23 ·cited 9×
  The dissenting judge holds that the admission of the appellant's adoptive statement does not violate the Confrontation Clause because the accused is always available to testify and confront their own statements.
• United States v. Sublet
  644 F.2d 737· 8th Cir.· 1981-03-25 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a mistrial based on a juror's overhearing a spectator's comment, nor was there a Sixth Amendment violation regarding the lineup, and the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction
• United States v. Zimeri-Safie
  585 F.2d 1318· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-11 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of 'other acts' (possession of a manual on deception and related notes) to prove knowledge and intent, nor in admitting expert testimony regarding the defendant's alien status.
• Ellis v. Capps
  500 F.2d 225· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-13 ·cited 9×
  The court held that admitting the inmate's extensive institutional record was reversible error due to its highly prejudicial nature outweighing its minimal probative value.
• United States v. Justo Jonah Santos
  947 F.3d 711· 11th Cir.· 2020-01-09 ·cited 8×
  Justo Jonah Santos, a Dominican-born permanent resident, was convicted of unlawfully procuring naturalization and misusing a naturalization certificate after he obtained citizenship in 2009 by submitting false statements on his naturalization application that failed to disclose a
• Hogle v. State
  250 So. 3d 178· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-06-18 ·cited 8×
  Jon Hogle was convicted of lewd or lascivious exhibition after exposing himself to a thirteen-year-old girl on a beach. He appealed challenging the admission of evidence regarding his post-incident conduct, arguing prosecutorial misconduct during closing statements, and contestin
• Corbett v. State
  113 So. 3d 965· Fla. 2d DCA· 2013-02-27 ·cited 8×
  Darren Corbett appealed his convictions for kidnapping and robbery with a deadly weapon, challenging the admission of Williams rule evidence concerning similar crimes against a different victim and a misspelling of the victim's name in the information. The court affirmed his conv
• Markinsey Metayer v. State
  89 So. 3d 1003· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-05-23 ·cited 8×
  Markinsey Metayer was convicted of first-degree murder in a triple shooting that killed Adam Jacobs and wounded two others. The appellate court reversed his conviction because the trial court abused its discretion in admitting evidence of a .40 caliber pistol and .45 caliber ammu
• Munroe v. State
  983 So. 2d 637· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-05-14 ·cited 8×
  Joyce Munroe appealed her conviction for trafficking in over 400 grams of cocaine, challenging prosecutorial comments about her silence when cocaine was discovered in her bag at the airport. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that t
• Coverdale v. State
  940 So. 2d 558· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-10-27 ·cited 8×
  Keith Coverdale was convicted of aggravated stalking in violation of Florida law after allegedly violating a domestic violence injunction by repeatedly contacting his ex-partner. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court abused its di
• Wyon Dale Childers v. State
  936 So. 2d 619· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-06-28 ·cited 8×
  Childers sought certification to challenge the procedural regularity of the Florida First District Court of Appeal's decision to convert a three-judge panel decision (which would have reversed his conviction) into an en banc decision (which affirmed his conviction). The court den
• Curry v. State
  839 So. 2d 887· Fla. 3d DCA· 2003-03-12 ·cited 8×
  Robert Eugene Curry was convicted of sexual battery on a minor based partly on testimony about a news report of his arrest for unrelated sexual conduct with high school students, which allegedly prompted the victim to disclose the decades-old abuse. The appellate court reversed,
• Williams v. State
  834 So. 2d 923· Fla. 3d DCA· 2003-01-15 ·cited 8×
  The trial court abused its discretion in preventing defense counsel from eliciting that an eyewitness was expelled from the police explorers, but the error was harmless. The admission of a photograph of the victim in military dress was proper as relevant identification evidence a
• Rossbach v. Rundle
  128 F. Supp. 2d 1348· S.D. Fla.· 2000-02-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the media has a right to access court records, this right is not absolute and can be balanced against competing interests, such as the privacy of non-parties, to justify sealing certain documents. The court also limited the scope of discovery in the unde
• State v. O'Brien
  633 So. 2d 96· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-03-02 ·cited 8×
  The State sought certiorari review of in limine orders excluding evidence that the defendant sexually abused three other children, similar to the charged offenses of sexually battering two children. The Florida appellate court affirmed the trial court's exclusion, holding that th
• Porter v. Vista Bldg. Maint. Servs., Inc.
  630 So. 2d 205· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-12-14 ·cited 8×
  In this slip-and-fall personal injury case, the court held that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of the plaintiff's prior alcohol abuse where it was undisputed that he was sober at the time of the incident. The court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that
• United States v. Rodriguez-Garcia
  983 F.2d 1563· 10th Cir.· 1993-01-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress evidence obtained through consent searches, admitting recorded conversations, refusing certain jury instructions, or applying the Sentencing Guidelines. The court also found no reversible error r
• United States v. Saffeels
  982 F.2d 1199· 8th Cir.· 1992-12-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's arguments regarding the Interstate Agreement on Detainers, Fourth Amendment violations, admissibility of prior bad acts evidence, and sentencing as a career offender were without merit.
• United States v. Pless
  982 F.2d 1118· 7th Cir.· 1992-12-18 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy and firearms offenses, but remanded for completion of the written sentencing record.
• United States v. Easter
  981 F.2d 1549· 10th Cir.· 1992-12-10 ·cited 8×
  The court should remand for a hearing on the defendant's claim that the government withheld a sentence reduction motion in retaliation for exercising his right to a jury trial.
• United States v. Fair
  979 F.2d 1037· 5th Cir.· 1992-12-09 ·cited 8×
  A defendant may rely on their presentence report to establish inability to pay a fine, and a cost of incarceration fine cannot be imposed without an initial punitive fine.