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. Willoughby
  860 F.2d 15· 2d Cir.· 1988-10-06 ·cited 7×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the taping of inmate telephone calls and conversations was permissible under Title III and the Fourth Amendment, and that Arthur Prioleau's conversation did not require Miranda warnings.
• Oliveri v. DELTA S.S. Lines, Inc.
  849 F.2d 742· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-13 ·cited 7×
  The court held that evidence of future earning capacity was admissible, but the trial court's method of discounting future damages was incorrect. The court reversed and remanded unless the plaintiff accepted a remittitur.
• Orris Poling and Ruth Poling v. Morgan
  829 F.2d 882· 9th Cir.· 1987-10-07 ·cited 7×
  The court held that a guarantor is not a secured party with rights to repossess collateral before paying the full debt, and that denying leave to amend a complaint for conversion was an abuse of discretion.
• Mills v. Scully
  826 F.2d 1192· 2d Cir.· 1987-08-26 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting the writ of habeas corpus, finding neither prosecutorial misconduct nor ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Kennon v. Slipstreamer, Inc.
  794 F.2d 1067· 5th Cir.· 1986-07-23 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the district court's mention of settlement amounts to the jury was improper under Federal Rule of Evidence 408, as it was offered to prove the amount of the claim.
• Nettles v. Electrolux Motor AB
  784 F.2d 1574· 11th Cir.· 1986-03-26 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the manufacturer's motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict, as reasonable minds could differ on whether the chain saw was defective due to the absence of a chain brake under Alabama law.
• The First Nat'l Bank OF Kenosha v. United States
  763 F.2d 891· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-07 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of a post-death partnership agreement and comparable property sales, and that the jury's valuation verdict had a reasonable basis in the record.
• United States v. Smith
  750 F.2d 1215· 4th Cir.· 1984-12-17 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the district court properly construed the Classified Information Procedures Act and that its admission of classified evidence complied with Federal Rules of Evidence 401 and 403.
• United States v. Tidell Lewis
  701 F.2d 972· D.C. Cir.· 1983-03-04 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the government presented sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the admission of evidence regarding an arrest warrant was proper under the circumstances.
• United States v. Dixon
  698 F.2d 445· 11th Cir.· 1983-02-18 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for tax evasion was supported by sufficient evidence that he received funds in the tax year in question, and that the admission of certain prejudicial evidence was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Hitchmon
  609 F.2d 1098· 5th Cir.· 1979-12-28 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by curtailing the cross-examination of government witnesses, thereby denying the appellants a fair trial.
• Ostrow v. Globecast Am. Inc.
  825 F. Supp. 2d 1267· S.D. Fla.· 2011-10-18 ·cited 6×
  The court granted motions to exclude evidence of settlement negotiations and discrimination against other employees, denied motions to exclude parol evidence and evidence of past severance practices, and deferred ruling on excluding a third-party settlement agreement.
• Stephenson v. State
  31 So. 3d 847· Fla. 3d DCA· 2010-03-03 ·cited 6×
  Amy Stephenson was convicted of aggravated manslaughter of a child and sentenced to twenty-five years for the death of her thirteen-month-old daughter. The Florida appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding fundamental error where the prosecutor improperly eli
• State v. Sercey
  825 So. 2d 959· Fla. 1st DCA· 2002-06-17 ·cited 6×
  The State of Florida appeals a trial court order excluding all evidence of marijuana in the defendant's blood in a DUI manslaughter prosecution. The appellate court reverses in part, holding that GC/MS analysis of THC and cTHC is established and generally accepted, and that quali
• Anderson v. State
  786 So. 2d 6· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-12-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to allow the defendant's telemarketing expert to testify regarding industry custom and usage, and this error was not harmless.
• Cnty. OF Volusia v. Kemp
  764 So. 2d 770· Fla. 5th DCA· 2000-07-14 ·cited 6×
  Volusia County appealed a jury verdict in Kemp's malicious prosecution suit brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, arguing the trial court erred in admitting expert testimony on constitutional law enforcement standards. The appellate court reversed, finding the expert testimony improper
• Algernon Sampson v. State
  645 So. 2d 1005· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-07-29 ·cited 6×
  Algernon Sampson appealed his jury conviction for possession of cocaine and battery, along with the revocation of his probation. The court reversed all convictions and the probation revocation, holding that testimony about Sampson's prior cocaine sale was improperly admitted as r
• Hall v. W. Prod. Co.
  988 F.2d 1050· 10th Cir.· 1993-03-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding of a breach of contract for a definite term and that the plaintiff was a prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees despite receiving no damages on the ADEA claim, as he prevailed on the contract claim.
• United States v. Mills
  987 F.2d 1311· 8th Cir.· 1993-03-08 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the district court did not err in striking jurors for cause, admitting evidence, calculating the loss amount under the sentencing guidelines, or applying enhancements for role in the offense and obstruction of justice.
• United States v. Boykin
  986 F.2d 270· 8th Cir.· 1993-02-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict on the firearm-related charges and that the defendant's right to a fair trial was not violated by the delayed disclosure of witness perjury, as the witness was recalled and cross-examined.
• Child's. Palace, Inc. v. Alveria Johnson and Michael Johnson
  609 So. 2d 755· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-12-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that prior convictions for writing worthless checks are admissible to impeach a witness's credibility, and excluding such evidence was an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Bello-Perez
  977 F.2d 664· 1st Cir.· 1992-09-29 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the evidence supported a single conspiracy charge and that various evidentiary and sentencing challenges lacked merit.
• Morgan v. Woessner
  975 F.2d 629· 9th Cir.· 1992-09-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court correctly determined that the initial stop of Morgan was a seizure unsupported by reasonable suspicion, but remanded for further proceedings regarding punitive damages.
• Johnson v. Hugo's Skateway
  974 F.2d 1408· 4th Cir.· 1992-09-08 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the $175,000 punitive damages award, finding that the jury instructions and evidence presented sufficiently constrained the jury's discretion to comport with due process.
• Snider v. Consolidation Coal Co.
  973 F.2d 555· 7th Cir.· 1992-08-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the jury's verdict on tort claims did not estop the judge from finding for the plaintiff on the Title VII claim, and that the damages awarded were appropriate.
• United States v. Wilson
  966 F.2d 243· 7th Cir.· 1992-06-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the admission of the gun did not constitute plain error and affirmed the conviction, but remanded for resentencing due to a misapplication of the Sentencing Guidelines.
• Barrett v. United States
  965 F.2d 1184· 1st Cir.· 1992-06-08 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the motion to vacate, holding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate entitlement to relief or an evidentiary hearing on his claims.
• Hill v. Marshall
  962 F.2d 1209· 6th Cir.· 1992-05-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in labeling a judgment notwithstanding the verdict as a remittitur and in setting aside the jury's punitive damages award, but affirmed the denial of the defendant's motions regarding liability and compensatory damages.
• United States v. Zaida Rodriguez
  961 F.2d 1089· 3d Cir.· 1992-04-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the schoolyard provision of federal drug laws applies to a defendant who possesses drugs within 1,000 feet of a school with the intent to distribute those drugs at any location, not just within 1,000 feet of a school.
• Hygh v. Jacobs
  961 F.2d 359· 2d Cir.· 1992-04-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that expert testimony stating an officer's conduct was 'totally improper' and 'not justified' crossed the line into legal conclusions, but was harmless error. The court also held that a dismissal 'in the interest of justice' does not constitute a favorable terminat
• United States v. Noland
  960 F.2d 1384· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of prior insurance claims to show motive and intent, nor in applying a sentencing enhancement for obstruction of justice based on the defendant's solicitation of false testimony from her children.
• United States v. Valencia
  957 F.2d 1189· 5th Cir.· 1992-03-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to play a Spanish language tape recording to the jury, in omitting a lesser-included offense instruction, or in admitting hearsay statements offered to explain the DEA's conduct.
• Wallace v. Mulholland
  957 F.2d 333· 7th Cir.· 1992-02-20 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the trial judge acted within his discretion regarding evidence exclusion, judge's conduct, and attorney fee awards, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict.
• DOE v. Sullivan Cnty.
  956 F.2d 545· 6th Cir.· 1992-02-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting directed verdicts for certain defendants and in limiting evidence of a felony conviction, but affirmed directed verdicts for other defendants and the jury instructions. The court reversed and remanded for further proceeding
• United States v. DiNOME
  954 F.2d 839· 2d Cir.· 1992-01-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Heilmans' convictions for mail and wire fraud must be reversed due to prejudice from inadmissible RICO evidence after their RICO charges were dismissed. The court also affirmed convictions for civil rights murder, finding sufficient evidence of intent to i
• Bennett v. State
  593 So. 2d 1069· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-01-14 ·cited 6×
  Troy Bennett appeals his convictions for possession and sale of cocaine, challenging the admission of evidence of a subsequent drug transaction occurring three hours after the charged offense and his sentencing as a habitual offender. The court affirmed the convictions but vacate
• United States v. Moye
  951 F.2d 59· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior drug offense, in its jury instructions regarding intent, or in limiting closing argument time.
• United States v. Reva Young
  952 F.2d 1252· 3d Cir.· 1991-12-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's actions in opening an unauthorized account and misrepresenting her signatory authority constituted bank fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1344(1), and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding certain evidence.
• United States v. MacEo
  947 F.2d 1191· 5th Cir.· 1991-10-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding of a single conspiracy and the individual convictions of the appellants, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• Leila Malave-Felix v. Volvo CAR Corp.
  946 F.2d 967· 1st Cir.· 1991-10-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to establish proximate cause for her injuries, and that the trial judge's conduct did not demonstrate bias.
• Ludis J. Cooper v. The Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
  945 F.2d 1103· 9th Cir.· 1991-09-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that evidence of dissimilar accidents is admissible for impeachment of expert witnesses, and that the exclusion of OSHA regulations was harmless error.
• United States v. Delia
  944 F.2d 1010· 2d Cir.· 1991-09-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that venue was proper in the Southern District of New York because the 'making' of the forged checks, including the acquisition of necessary components, began there, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of the defendant's a
• Denison v. Swaco Geolograph Co.
  941 F.2d 1416· 10th Cir.· 1991-08-16 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the denial of the defendant's post-verdict motions, finding sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict for the plaintiff on his ADEA claim.
• United States v. Poindexter
  942 F.2d 354· 6th Cir.· 1991-08-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by limiting closing arguments regarding the lack of fingerprint evidence and by criticizing defense counsel, denying one defendant a fair trial, but that such errors were harmless as to the other defendant due to strong
• United States v. Galloway
  937 F.2d 542· 10th Cir.· 1991-06-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court properly excluded evidence of the victim's past sexual behavior under Rule 412, and a remand for Rule 403 balancing was unnecessary.
• Secretary OF Labor v. DeSISTO
  929 F.2d 789· 1st Cir.· 1991-03-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by limiting the number of witnesses, which prevented a fair determination of the case, and vacated the judgment for a new trial.
• United States v. IVY
  929 F.2d 147· 5th Cir.· 1991-03-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress statements, and the admission of evidence regarding the shooting of Alvin King was proper.
• Donald v. Balfour J. Rast
  927 F.2d 379· 8th Cir.· 1991-03-01 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge believes the trial court erred in excluding evidence, thus denying the appellant a fair trial.
• Gentile v. The Cnty. OF Suffolk
  926 F.2d 142· 2d Cir.· 1991-02-11 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge argues that the jury's verdict was bizarre and inconsistent, and that the trial judge made numerous prejudicial errors regarding the admissibility of evidence and jury instructions.
• United States v. Thorn
  917 F.2d 170· 5th Cir.· 1990-10-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the defendant's convictions for conspiracy, mail fraud, and equity skimming, and that the exclusion of evidence of a witness's unrelated state indictment was not an abuse of discretion.