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. Anzalone
  783 F.2d 10· 1st Cir.· 1986-02-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that evidence of prior fraudulent insurance claims, even from entities not named in the indictment, was admissible to prove the scheme and the substantiality of the misrepresentations, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting such evidence
• United States v. Efrain Lamberty
  778 F.2d 59· 1st Cir.· 1985-11-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that admitting evidence of prior bad acts, which was irrelevant and highly prejudicial, constituted reversible error because it was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Smith
  776 F.2d 892· 10th Cir.· 1985-11-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the cumulative effect of the district court's erroneous evidentiary rulings denied the defendant a fair trial.
• United States v. Schaffner
  771 F.2d 149· 6th Cir.· 1985-08-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that evidence of prior acquittal for destruction of evidence was inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) because intent was not a disputed issue, and its admission was not harmless error.
• United States v. Hastings J. Dise
  763 F.2d 586· 3d Cir.· 1985-06-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction, the jury instructions were correct, evidence of other crimes was properly admitted, and the motion to dismiss the indictment was properly denied.
• Consuelo Mercado v. Austin Police Dep't
  754 F.2d 1266· 5th Cir.· 1985-03-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an unconventional dismissal procedure under Rule 41(b) was permissible and did not deny due process, as the plaintiff failed to make an adequate offer of proof for her remaining witnesses and her own testimony was impeached.
• Otwell v. Motel 6, Inc.
  755 F.2d 665· 8th Cir.· 1985-02-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting expert testimony, excluding certain evidence, or in its jury instructions, and that the plaintiff failed to preserve certain errors for appeal.
• Nicholson v. Layton
  747 F.2d 1225· 8th Cir.· 1984-11-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of the appellants' prior convictions and the victim's condition, as the prejudicial effect did not outweigh the probative value.
• United States v. August
  745 F.2d 400· 6th Cir.· 1984-10-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge's comment to the jury about a conspiracy existing, while error, constituted harmless error due to strong curative instructions, jury questioning, and substantial evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Brainard
  745 F.2d 320· 4th Cir.· 1984-10-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant waived any objections arising from missing trial exhibits due to failure to make a timely claim, and that evidence of a prior investment scheme was properly admitted to show knowledge and credibility.
• United States v. Teague
  737 F.2d 378· 4th Cir.· 1984-06-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of prior bad acts evidence and the prosecutor's contact with a defense witness's attorney did not constitute reversible error, as any potential prejudice was either properly managed by jury instructions or harmless.
• United States v. Marvin
  720 F.2d 12· 8th Cir.· 1983-10-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying motions to suppress evidence and statements, nor in denying a motion for a new trial or limiting cross-examination.
• Magayanes v. T.J. Terrance
  739 F.2d 1131· 7th Cir.· 1983-09-26 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the judgment for the defendants, finding no merit in the plaintiff's challenges to the jury verdict.
• United States v. Bongard
  713 F.2d 419· 8th Cir.· 1983-08-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that any error in admitting a co-defendant's mug shot was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting testimony regarding attempts to influence a witness.
• Saturn Mfg., Inc. v. Williams Patent Crusher & Pulverizer Co. & Robert M. Williams
  713 F.2d 1347· 8th Cir.· 1983-07-27 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the patent validity and infringement findings but reversed and remanded on the issues of increased damages and prejudgment interest.
• Almonte v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co.
  705 F.2d 566· 1st Cir.· 1983-04-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge committed reversible error by failing to dismiss the bad faith claim and by allowing prejudicial statements and evidence related to it to be presented to the jury without proper admonition.
• United States v. Naylor
  705 F.2d 110· 4th Cir.· 1983-04-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while one prior misdemeanor conviction was admissible as a prior similar act, the admissibility of the second was questionable, but any error was harmless. Therefore, the trial court's denial of the motion in limine was affirmed.
• Roshan v. Fard
  705 F.2d 102· 4th Cir.· 1983-04-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the exclusion of evidence regarding the defendant's role as a DEA informant and the plaintiff's prior drug conviction was improper, as it was relevant to establishing motive.
• McKINNEY v. Galvin
  701 F.2d 584· 6th Cir.· 1983-03-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that admitting evidence of the defendant's refusal to submit to a breathalyzer test was proper in a civil rights action, as it was relevant and not prohibited by federal or state law.
• United States v. Sheeran
  699 F.2d 112· 3d Cir.· 1983-01-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that mail fraud convictions must be reversed due to improper application of the statute to rights derived solely from NLRA Section 7, but RICO convictions are affirmed as they were predicated on independent Taft-Hartley violations. The case is remanded for resenten
• United States v. Smith
  685 F.2d 1293· 11th Cir.· 1982-09-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that evidence of prior insurance claims was admissible to prove the defendant's scheme to defraud and intent, as its probative value was not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.
• Auto Owners Ins. Co. v. Bass
  684 F.2d 764· 11th Cir.· 1982-09-01 ·cited 4×
  A jury verdict, though defective in form, can be upheld if it can be reasonably interpreted from the pleadings, evidence, and jury instructions to ascertain the jury's intent. The court found the verdict clearly intended to hold John liable but was too uncertain to hold Gloria li
• Nickerson v. State
  417 So. 2d 762· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-07-28 ·cited 4×
  David Nickerson appeals his conviction and enhanced sentence for attempted possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirms the conviction, rejecting all three of Nickerson's contentions regarding proof of prior conviction, admissi
• United States v. Adcock
  651 F.2d 338· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of the defendant's statements, made during trial and to a Secret Service agent, was proper as they were relevant to proving intent for obstruction charges and did not violate hearsay rules or Rule 403.
• United States v. McMANAMAN
  653 F.2d 458· 10th Cir.· 1981-07-08 ·cited 4×
  The court reviewed the admissibility of an insanity expert's testimony and whether the prosecution waived its objection by failing to timely object to the testimony.
• United States v. Koger
  646 F.2d 1194· 7th Cir.· 1981-04-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that while the Speedy Trial Act was violated, sanctions were not appropriate, but the erroneous admission of evidence of a third party's conviction and incarceration required reversal and remand for a new trial.
• Wilson v. Scripps-Howard Broad. Co.
  642 F.2d 371· 6th Cir.· 1981-04-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a private plaintiff in a defamation case must prove the falsity of the defamatory statement as part of proving fault, and that evidence of prior lawsuits was admissible to impeach a witness's testimony.
• Fury Imports, Inc. v. Shakespeare Co.
  625 F.2d 585· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the statute of limitations for tortious interference with contract accrues upon the actual breach of the contract, not upon the agreement to breach, and that the prior stipulation and appellate decisions implicitly governed punitive damages under New York law.
• United States v. Londer Flenory
  619 F.2d 301· 3d Cir.· 1980-04-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in suppressing out-of-court and in-court identification testimony based on witness uncertainty, as such factors go to the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility.
• Smith v. John Swafford Furniture Co., Inc.
  614 F.2d 552· 6th Cir.· 1980-02-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in ordering a remittitur because the jury's award was not clearly within the maximum limit of a reasonable range, given the inconclusive medical evidence.
• Marshall v. Commonwealth Aquarium
  611 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1979-12-13 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's finding that the employer violated OSHA by discharging an employee for reporting a health hazard, finding no clear error in the lower court's factual determinations and no prejudice from evidentiary rulings.
• United States v. Calhoun
  604 F.2d 1216· 9th Cir.· 1979-09-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that admitting evidence of unrelated bank robbery bait bills was an abuse of discretion because its probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.
• United States v. Carlone
  603 F.2d 63· 8th Cir.· 1979-08-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, as the evidence did not meet the required legal standards for such a motion.
• United States v. McGEE
  572 F.2d 1097· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-10 ·cited 4×
  A 'ten-percenter' who cashes winning lottery tickets and files a Form 1099 using their own name can be convicted of preparing and presenting false or fraudulent documents to the IRS.
• United States v. Quade
  563 F.2d 375· 8th Cir.· 1977-10-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict, the prior injunction was admissible as background and for proving intent, and the sentences imposed under the contempt statute were legally permissible.
• Dupuie v. Egeler
  552 F.2d 704· 6th Cir.· 1977-04-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the admission of identification testimony, even if somewhat contradictory, did not violate federal due process when corroborated by other evidence and when the jury was allowed to weigh its credibility.
• United States v. Ewing
  140 F.4th 1339· 11th Cir.· 2025-06-23 ·cited 3×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that using Torrential Downpour to download publicly shared files from a peer-to-peer network does not constitute a Fourth Amendment search because the defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in those files. The court also found no abuse of dis
• United States v. Cenephat
  115 F.4th 1359· 11th Cir.· 2024-09-23 ·cited 3×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of a drive-by shooting and prior convictions, nor in applying sentencing enhancements for attempted murder and reckless flight.
• Johnson v. State
  47 Fla. L. Weekly D1695· Fla. 1st DCA· 2022-11-30 ·cited 3×
  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a demonstrative animation of stab wounds, autopsy and crime scene photographs, and did not err in denying motions for mistrial based on prosecutorial comments.
• Scott v. State
  330 So. 3d 562· Fla. 4th DCA· 2021-12-08 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court affirmed a conviction for second-degree murder but reversed an order of restitution. The court found sufficient evidence for the conviction, despite it being circumstantial, and upheld the admission of a saw found near the crime scene. However, the restitution
• Gonzalez v. State
  306 So. 3d 1124· Fla. 3d DCA· 2020-08-26 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court reversed convictions and sentences for aggravated burglary, armed kidnapping, attempted murder, and firearm possession by a felon. The court found that admitting photographs of a glove found in a van, failing to submit the felon-in-possession charge to the jur
• Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Chadwell
  306 So. 3d 174· Fla. 3d DCA· 2020-06-03 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court affirmed a jury verdict for the plaintiff in an Engle-progeny tobacco lawsuit. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination regarding a prior asbestos claim and that the jury instructions on fraudulent concealm
• Mathieu v. State
  258 So. 3d 528· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-10-10 ·cited 3×
  A trial court does not abuse its discretion by permitting a witness to testify where the witness provides substantive evidence probative of facts in dispute, even if portions of that testimony are inconsistent with prior statements, because impeachment alone is not the primary pu
• Pierre v. State
  246 So. 3d 545· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-05-16 ·cited 3×
  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the second ski mask as relevant evidence, and Pierre's arguments regarding unfair prejudice and expert testimony were not preserved for appeal because he failed to assert the specific legal bases for his objections at tria
• Damarcus J. Kirkland-Williams v. State
  230 So. 3d 580· Fla. 2d DCA· 2017-11-03 ·cited 3×
  Damarcus Kirkland-Williams was convicted of first-degree felony murder while engaged in aggravated child abuse and aggravated child abuse in the death of a 13-month-old child. He appeals arguing that the trial court erred in admitting "Williams rule" evidence of a prior incident
• Hernan Concepcion v. State
  188 So. 3d 5· Fla. 3d DCA· 2016-03-02 ·cited 3×
  Hernán Concepcion appeals his convictions for lewd and lascivious molestation of a child under twelve, kidnapping of a child, and lewd and lascivious exhibition. He raises three claims: trial court abuse of discretion in limiting cross-examination of the victim's mother, improper
• Cavaliere v. State
  147 So. 3d 628· Fla. 2d DCA· 2014-09-12 ·cited 3×
  Henry Keith Cavaliere appeals his conviction for lewd and lascivious molestation of a child. The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding reversible error in the trial court's allowance of credibility-bolstering testimony from law enf
• Ricketts v. State
  125 So. 3d 194· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-01-23 ·cited 3×
  Jerome Ricketts was convicted of cannabis trafficking under Florida law. He appealed arguing that the trial court improperly admitted Williams rule evidence of empty crates found in his storage unit and that the trafficking statute was facially unconstitutional. The Fourth Distri
• Harley v. Health Ctr. of Coconut Creek, Inc.
  518 F. Supp. 2d 1364· S.D. Fla.· 2007-09-27 ·cited 3×
  The court denied the defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings regarding res judicata, finding it unclear that the state court judgment precluded the FMLA claims. The court also ruled on various motions in limine, granting some and denying others, and reserving judgment on
• Mamerto Izquierdo v. State
  890 So. 2d 1263· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-01-21 ·cited 3×
  Mamerto Izquierdo appeals his convictions for aggravated assault and misdemeanor battery following a jury trial. The appellate court reverses the misdemeanor battery conviction due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as the misdemeanor did not arise from the same circumstance