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. Noble C. Beasley
  585 F.2d 796· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's tax conviction was valid because there was sufficient independent evidence of a likely source of taxable income, even if potentially impeached testimony was disregarded.
• United States v. Ogle
  587 F.2d 938· 8th Cir.· 1978-12-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions and that the admission of a prior foreign conviction for identity purposes was not prejudicial error.
• United States v. Nat'l Homes Constr. Corp. & Firemen's Ins. Co. of Newark
  581 F.2d 157· 8th Cir.· 1978-07-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's damage award and that the trial court did not err in admitting certain evidence or awarding costs.
• United States v. Hajal
  555 F.2d 558· 6th Cir.· 1977-03-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's findings of guilt for conspiracy to violate federal drug laws, and that any errors made by the trial court were harmless.
• United States v. Juarez
  549 F.2d 1113· 7th Cir.· 1977-02-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that admitting the officers' reports for credibility purposes and upholding a search warrant with a stamped signature were not errors.
• United States v. Macrina
  109 F.4th 1341· 11th Cir.· 2024-07-30 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings or its refusal to give a proposed jury instruction, affirming the defendant's convictions.
• United States v. Fey
  89 F.4th 903· 11th Cir.· 2023-12-28 ·cited 5×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that any error in admitting evidence of Fey's solicitation of a witness murder was harmless, the denial of a spoliation instruction was not plain error, and the admission of testimony about a coconspirator's death was harmless.
• Taylor v. Shandex Truck, Inc.
  2019 WL 8989908· M.D. Fla.· 2021-08-02 ·cited 5×
  The court denied all pending motions in limine without prejudice due to procedural deficiencies and rescheduled related deadlines and conferences.
• Ermini v. Scott
  937 F.3d 1329· 11th Cir.· 2019-09-10 ·cited 5×
  The court held that federal law governs whether a district court may inform the jury about the legal effect of its findings, and that doing so accurately is permissible. It also held that evidence of deputies' use of force was admissible in a negligent wellness check claim, and t
• State v. Martin
  277 So. 3d 265· Fla. 3d DCA· 2019-07-31 ·cited 5×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's decision to exclude a defendant's post-Miranda videotaped statement. The court found that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding the evidence, as it was highly probative to the defendant's credibility and not unfairly preju
• Peralta-Morales v. State
  143 So. 3d 483· Fla. 1st DCA· 2014-07-30 ·cited 5×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that the admission of collateral crime evidence was not an abuse of discretion.
• Yaite Gonzalez-Valdes v. State
  834 So. 2d 933· Fla. 3d DCA· 2003-01-22 ·cited 5×
  Yaite Gonzalez-Valdes appeals her second-degree murder conviction for shooting her live-in boyfriend, claiming trial court errors in denying her mistrial motion, admitting testimony about the victim's non-abusive history, and permitting improper prosecution remarks. The appellate
• Beckett v. State
  730 So. 2d 809· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-04-07 ·cited 5×
  The court held that while admitting evidence of the defendant's father's prior misconduct was an error, it was not prejudicial and did not affect the outcome of the trial.
• Lee v. Executive Airlines, Inc.
  31 F. Supp. 2d 1355· S.D. Fla.· 1998-08-19 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the plaintiff's motion to compel further discovery was denied as unduly burdensome, and the plaintiff's motion to exclude the EEOC determination letter was granted due to its conclusory nature and potential for prejudice.
• Petruzzi's Iga Supermarkets, Inc. v. Darling-Delaware Co., Inc.
  998 F.2d 1224· 3d Cir.· 1993-07-13 ·cited 5×
  The court held that evidence of an agreement not to solicit competitors' customers, coupled with other circumstantial evidence, can be sufficient to defeat summary judgment in an antitrust case. However, mere opportunity to conspire or socialization among competitors is insuffici
• Sparks v. Gilley Trucking Co.
  992 F.2d 50· 4th Cir.· 1993-04-21 ·cited 5×
  The admission of prior speeding tickets was not an abuse of discretion, as they were relevant to proving intent to race.
• United States v. Landen Max Dula & Accrabond Corp.
  989 F.2d 772· 5th Cir.· 1993-04-16 ·cited 5×
  The court affirmed convictions, finding no error in the denial of a mistrial, the admission of evidence under Rule 404(b), or the sufficiency of evidence for intent to defraud, but dismissed the Brady claim due to lack of record.
• United States v. Filemon Bernal-Obeso
  989 F.2d 331· 9th Cir.· 1993-03-29 ·cited 5×
  The court vacated the conviction and remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine the admissibility of disputed evidence regarding the informant's credibility.
• United States v. DeVILLIO
  983 F.2d 1185· 2d Cir.· 1993-01-21 ·cited 5×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in admitting certain evidence or in denying the motion for severance, and that the admission of co-conspirator statements did not violate Bruton.
• Charles B. Pitts Real Est., Inc. v. Hater
  602 So. 2d 961· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-04-24 ·cited 5×
  Real estate brokers appealed a jury verdict awarding them only $2,500 instead of $400,000 in commission for a failed land sale transaction. The court affirmed, rejecting the brokers' arguments that evidence of a settlement between the sellers and the original buyer should have be
• United States v. Milner
  962 F.2d 908· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-23 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the trial judge's explicit explanation to the jury venire of the defendant's custody status and the reasons for security measures, including a comparison to Manuel Noriega, created an unacceptable risk of prejudice and deprived the defendant of a fair trial.
• Morgan v. City OF Marmaduke
  958 F.2d 207· 8th Cir.· 1992-02-27 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding evidence of a prior incident involving Jetton and a motorcyclist, nor in its judgment for the City. However, the court reversed the judgment against Jetton, finding the admission of evidence regarding the Caraway inc
• Bonilla v. Yamaha Motors Corp.
  955 F.2d 150· 1st Cir.· 1992-01-31 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the trial court committed prejudicial error by admitting evidence of the plaintiff's prior and subsequent speeding tickets, as this evidence was not admissible under Federal Rules of Evidence 404(b) or 608(b) and likely influenced the jury's verdict.
• Odis Robertson v. Union Pac. R.R. Co.
  954 F.2d 1433· 8th Cir.· 1992-01-27 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence under 23 U.S.C. § 409, nor in excluding evidence of subsequent incidents.
• Johnson v. Hugo's Skateway
  949 F.2d 1338· 4th Cir.· 1991-11-22 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the jury's award of punitive damages, made without a guiding standard and reviewed under traditional excessiveness standards, violated due process. However, the majority's adoption of new review procedures conflicts with the Seventh Amendment.
• United States v. Jerome Wilbert Maddox (89-2084)
  944 F.2d 1223· 6th Cir.· 1991-09-03 ·cited 5×
  The court affirmed all convictions and sentences, finding no reversible error in the admission of evidence or procedural rulings.
• Freidus v. First Nat'l Bank OF Council Bluffs
  928 F.2d 793· 8th Cir.· 1991-03-08 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting settlement negotiation letters and excluding evidence of tax consequences, and that jury instructions were not erroneous.
• United States v. Foote
  920 F.2d 1395· 8th Cir.· 1990-12-10 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance, admitting the affidavit, or in sentencing the defendants, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. MacDonald Julius Jackson
  882 F.2d 1444· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-16 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the dissenting judge's arguments regarding the admissibility of prior bad acts evidence and evidence of poverty were not grounds for reversal.
• Merrick v. Mercantile-Safe Deposit & Tr. Co.
  855 F.2d 1095· 4th Cir.· 1988-09-02 ·cited 5×
  Mercantile could be held liable to a third-party beneficiary for negligence in estate planning services, and evidentiary rulings excluding settlement details and admitting expert testimony were not erroneous.
• United States v. Jimenez
  789 F.2d 167· 2d Cir.· 1986-04-30 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to make a finding as to whether the defendant made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
• Lloyd v. Am. Freedom Distillery, LLC
  2025 WL 1167802· M.D. Fla.· 2025-08-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a motion to strike is not the proper vehicle to challenge the language used in initial disclosures, especially when those disclosures have not been filed.
• Fitzgerald v. McNae
  2022 WL 4767092· S.D. Fla.· 2025-03-12 ·cited 4×
  The court granted the plaintiff's motion in limine to exclude evidence of alleged rape or sexual assault.
• Beal v. 3m Co.
  N.D. Fla.· 2022-04-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the expert testimony of Drs. Spankovich and Packer was admissible, as they provided reliable bases for linking the CAEv2 to the plaintiff's injuries and ruling out alternative causes. The court also ruled on the admissibility of defendants' experts' testimony,
• Valentine v. State
  307 So. 3d 726· Fla. 4th DCA· 2020-09-30 ·cited 4×
  The photographic lineup was not unnecessarily suggestive, and the manager's identification was reliable under the Manson test. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the manager's prior consistent statement identifying the defendant. Any evidentiary errors rega
• Ariz. Chem. Co., LLC v. Mohawk Indus., Inc.
  193 So. 3d 95· Fla. 1st DCA· 2016-05-20 ·cited 4×
  Arizona Chemical appealed a $70.1 million jury verdict for Mohawk Industries in a products liability case involving defective Unibond carpet backing. The court affirmed the verdict, rejecting Arizona's challenges to the exclusion of evidence regarding other product defects and th
• Black v. State
  120 So. 3d 654· Fla. 1st DCA· 2013-09-09 ·cited 4×
  Christopher Black appealed his conviction for aggravated battery with firearm discharge and related crimes, challenging the trial court's decision to allow the jury to view a videotaped police interview in which he appeared wearing jail restraints. The appellate court affirmed, f
• FEY v. State
  125 So. 3d 828· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-03-27 ·cited 4×
  George Fey was convicted of burglary with battery and lewd or lascivious conduct after entering victims' homes at night and positioning himself to be touched by sleeping boys' feet while masturbating. The Fourth District affirmed, holding that Fey's actions were substantially cer
• Mardala Derival v. State
  58 So. 3d 357· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-04-06 ·cited 4×
  Mardala Derival was convicted of child abuse after her five-month-old baby died from alcohol toxicity. On appeal, she challenged the trial court's failure to redact the interrogating officer's statements of fact from her recorded police statement, arguing such statements were unf
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Monterosso
  746 F. Supp. 2d 1253· S.D. Fla.· 2010-09-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that adverse inferences may be drawn against defendants Vargas and Lynch for invoking their Fifth Amendment privilege during depositions, and these inferences can also be drawn against GlobeTel.
• Downs v. State
  40 So. 3d 49· Fla. 5th DCA· 2010-07-02 ·cited 4×
  William Downs was convicted of capital sexual battery on a child under twelve and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed his conviction because the trial court erred in admitting evidence of uncharged shower incidents without the statu
• Stefan A. Armstrong v. State
  931 So. 2d 187· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-06-09 ·cited 4×
  Armstrong was convicted of robbery and sentenced as a habitual offender to 30 years imprisonment. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed the conviction, finding that the trial court committed reversible error by admitting Armstrong's statement to law enforcement made during
• Brown v. State
  719 So. 2d 882· Fla.· 1998-10-15 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court overruled its prior decision in Parker v. State and held that when a criminal defendant offers to stipulate to prior convicted felon status in a felon-in-possession of firearm case, the trial court must accept that stipulation, following the U.S. Supreme
• Ermon Lee Lane v. State
  706 So. 2d 94· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-02-18 ·cited 4×
  Ermon Lee Lane appealed his conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of his prior felony convictions despite his offer to stipulate to his felon status. The Third District Court
• Walker v. State
  665 So. 2d 1070· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-11-01 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no error in the admission of autopsy photographs and that any error in admitting the confession was harmless.
• United States v. Lambert
  995 F.2d 1006· 10th Cir.· 1993-06-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of preliminary discussions about the robbery, and that a sentencing enhancement for a threat made by a co-perpetrator was appropriate because it was reasonably foreseeable.
• United States v. Gilliam
  994 F.2d 97· 2d Cir.· 1993-06-02 ·cited 4×
  A stipulation of a prior conviction, while carrying a risk of unfair prejudice, is admissible under Rule 403 because its probative value substantially outweighs that risk.
• United States v. Garcia
  994 F.2d 1499· 10th Cir.· 1993-05-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conspiracy conviction, but the drug quantity calculation for sentencing was clearly erroneous. The court also found no plain error regarding the admission of coconspirator statements, lay opinion testimony, or the cro
• Gilbert v. Cosco Inc.
  989 F.2d 399· 10th Cir.· 1993-03-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting sled test evidence for illustrative purposes, excluding portions of memoranda deemed more prejudicial than probative, or refusing to give an adverse inference jury instruction.
• United States v. Bailey
  990 F.2d 119· 4th Cir.· 1993-03-22 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the admission of other crimes evidence under Rule 404(b) was proper and that the prosecution under the Hobbs Act did not violate the Tenth Amendment or lack sufficient evidence of interstate commerce interference.