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. Royal W. Hadfield, Jr.
  918 F.2d 987· 1st Cir.· 1990-10-31 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying a Franks hearing, admitting evidence, or in its rulings on the sufficiency of the evidence.
• United States v. Morales
  815 F.2d 725· 1st Cir.· 1987-03-19 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the extensive and pervasive pretrial publicity, coupled with the trial court's failure to adequately address its prejudicial impact, violated the defendants' right to a fair trial.
• United States v. Brennan
  798 F.2d 581· 2d Cir.· 1986-08-11 ·cited 50×
  The court held that prior grand jury testimony, though inadmissible as substantive evidence, could be admitted for rehabilitation purposes to rebut a charge of recent fabrication or improper influence, and that evidence of other uncharged crimes was admissible to complete the sto
• United States v. White
  794 F.2d 367· 8th Cir.· 1986-06-26 ·cited 50×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the district court's rulings on severance, evidentiary matters, jury instructions, or prosecutorial remarks.
• Martell v. Boardwalk Enters., Inc.
  748 F.2d 740· 2d Cir.· 1984-11-13 ·cited 50×
  The court held that while the jury's findings on liability were supported, the damages awarded were excessive and required a new trial or remittitur.
• United States v. McGUIRE
  744 F.2d 1197· 6th Cir.· 1984-09-21 ·cited 50×
  The court held that while the trial court erred in failing to give a specific good faith jury instruction and in instructing the jury that bank loan file documents constituted 'bank statements' under 18 U.S.C. § 1005, these errors were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The cour
• United States v. Zipkin
  729 F.2d 384· 6th Cir.· 1984-03-07 ·cited 50×
  The court held that admitting a bankruptcy judge's testimony on questions of law and interpretation of his own order constituted reversible error.
• Goodwin v. The Cir. Court OF ST. Louis Cnty.
  729 F.2d 541· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-06 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict against Judge Corrigan for sex discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
• United States v. Rodger Wagoner
  713 F.2d 1371· 8th Cir.· 1983-08-08 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of other wrongful acts, telephone records, or in its handling of the indictment submission to the jury.
• United States v. Loran Anthony Biswell
  700 F.2d 1310· 10th Cir.· 1983-02-22 ·cited 50×
  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of prior crimes or bad acts under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) for purposes of showing motive, intent, knowledge, or absence of mistake or accident.
• In re AIR Crash Disaster Near Chicago
  701 F.2d 1189· 7th Cir.· 1983-02-15 ·cited 50×
  A federal court in diversity jurisdiction may admit evidence of a decedent's potential income tax liability on lost earnings and may instruct the jury that the award is not taxable, as Illinois substantive law permits such adjustments to ensure compensatory damages.
• Chipman v. Mercer
  628 F.2d 528· 9th Cir.· 1980-09-04 ·cited 50×
  The denial of cross-examination to explore a witness's potential bias against a group to which the defendant belonged violated the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause.
• United States v. Will Renfro
  620 F.2d 497· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-30 ·cited 50×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court did not err in its discovery rulings, jury charge, or evidentiary decisions.
• United States v. Morgan O'Brien
  618 F.2d 1234· 7th Cir.· 1980-04-08 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the admission of prior similar acts evidence, edited recorded conversations, and the prosecutor's remarks did not constitute reversible error, and affirmed the convictions.
• United States v. King
  616 F.2d 1034· 8th Cir.· 1980-02-27 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and that prosecutorial misconduct and evidentiary errors did not prejudice the appellant's right to a fair trial.
• United States v. Ponticelli
  622 F.2d 985· 9th Cir.· 1980-01-30 ·cited 50×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction for making false declarations before a grand jury, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• United States v. Price
  617 F.2d 455· 7th Cir.· 1979-10-22 ·cited 50×
  The court held that evidence of prior similar acts was admissible to prove intent and victim's state of mind, and that the denial of a jury voir dire regarding a withdrawn transcript was not reversible error.
• United States v. Mohel
  604 F.2d 748· 2d Cir.· 1979-07-31 ·cited 50×
  The court held that admitting evidence of prior similar acts to prove intent and knowledge was reversible error when the defense had unequivocally conceded those elements.
• King v. Ford Motor Co.
  597 F.2d 436· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-20 ·cited 50×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict for the plaintiffs on multiple theories of liability, and the trial court did not err in denying motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial.
• United States v. Dolliole
  597 F.2d 102· 7th Cir.· 1979-04-20 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of prior crimes was permissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to prove intent, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting such evidence or in limiting cross-examination.
• United States v. Fosher
  590 F.2d 381· 1st Cir.· 1979-01-15 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding expert testimony on eyewitness unreliability and in denying funds for its preparation.
• United States v. Mangan
  575 F.2d 32· 2d Cir.· 1978-04-03 ·cited 50×
  The court held that Frank Mangan's tax returns were admissible as evidence in a criminal prosecution against him, and that handwriting exemplars and co-conspirator statements were properly admitted.
• United States v. Bilzerian
  926 F.2d 1285· 2d Cir.· 1991-01-03 ·cited 49×
  The court affirmed convictions for securities law violations but dissented on a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1001.
• United States v. Jackson
  886 F.2d 838· 7th Cir.· 1989-09-25 ·cited 49×
  The Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not extend to a presentence interview with a probation officer, and evidence of a defendant's refusal to comply with a court order to provide handwriting exemplars is admissible under Rule 404(b) as probative of consciousness of guilt.
• United States v. Normandeau
  800 F.2d 953· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-25 ·cited 49×
  The court held that knowledge of the quantity of marijuana is not an element of the offense under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), and that a warrantless search of a vehicle is permissible if supported by probable cause.
• United States v. Miller
  688 F.2d 652· 9th Cir.· 1982-09-21 ·cited 49×
  The court held that a theft victim's search of a suspect's property, even with prior police contact and consent, was not a government search subject to Fourth Amendment requirements because the victim acted on his own initiative to recover his property and gained access via conse
• United States v. Hall
  653 F.2d 1002· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-20 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the admission of DEA agent testimony regarding general investigative procedures was irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial, warranting reversal of the convictions.
• Christophersen v. Allied-Signal Corp.
  939 F.2d 1106· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-15 ·cited 48×
  The court's majority opinion, by reinterpreting Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 703, effectively shifts the determination of scientific methodology disputes from juries to district judges, thereby terminating cases before trial if the methodology lacks general acceptance.
• United States v. Gonzalez
  933 F.2d 417· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-01 ·cited 48×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentence, holding that the indictment was not multiplicitous, severance was not required, the display of cocaine was proper, expert testimony was admissible, and there was sufficient evidence for the convictions.
• Simmons, Inc. v. Pinkerton's, Inc.
  762 F.2d 591· 7th Cir.· 1985-05-28 ·cited 48×
  The dissenting judge argues that the erroneous jury instruction and admission of irrelevant evidence were not harmless errors and warrant a new trial.
• Christmas v. Lolita Sanders
  759 F.2d 1284· 7th Cir.· 1985-04-12 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse her discretion in excluding police reports offered as prior consistent statements and in excluding evidence of the plaintiff's prior rape conviction.
• United States v. Swingler
  758 F.2d 477· 10th Cir.· 1985-03-20 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the warrantless arrests of defendants Vicory, Houser, and Jahnke were supported by sufficient probable cause based on the totality of the circumstances and corroborating information.
• United States v. Shepherd
  739 F.2d 510· 10th Cir.· 1984-07-18 ·cited 48×
  The court held that admitting evidence of prior uncorroborated criminal acts, solely through the testimony of an accomplice, was an abuse of discretion because its prejudicial effect outweighed its probative value. The court also found no error in admitting co-conspirator stateme
• United States v. King
  713 F.2d 627· 11th Cir.· 1983-08-29 ·cited 48×
  The court held that prior trial testimony of a deceased witness, admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(1), should not be excluded under Federal Rule of Evidence 403 solely because the jury cannot observe the witness's demeanor, especially when the testimony is essentia
• United States v. Lopez
  709 F.2d 742· 1st Cir.· 1983-06-10 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendants' convictions for knowingly participating in the drug conspiracy, and that various trial errors were either not preserved or not prejudicial.
• United States v. Marshall
  683 F.2d 1212· 8th Cir.· 1982-08-04 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the admission of USDA memoranda containing unproven and prejudicial assertions of misconduct, along with the government's failure to timely disclose exculpatory evidence, tainted the defendant's conviction.
• United States v. Mitchell
  666 F.2d 1385· 11th Cir.· 1982-02-04 ·cited 48×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding sufficient evidence for the jury's verdict and that the admission of extrinsic evidence was proper.
• United States v. Penes
  577 F.2d 754· 1st Cir.· 1978-05-16 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in refusing to accept a nolo contendere plea without establishing a factual basis, nor in denying motions for recusal or a new trial based on juror competency. The court also found that the admission of certain statements, evidence
• Durns v. United States
  562 F.2d 542· 8th Cir.· 1977-09-14 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to identify the defendant as the perpetrator of the kidnapping, and that the trial court did not err in admitting the tape recording, weapons, clothing, evidence of a prior similar crime, or in refusing a lesser inclu
• United States v. Johnson
  558 F.2d 744· 5th Cir.· 1977-09-01 ·cited 48×
  The court held that evidence of tax overpayment was irrelevant to charges of making false and fraudulent corporate income tax returns and was properly excluded under Federal Rule of Evidence 403.
• United States v. Rocha
  553 F.2d 615· 9th Cir.· 1977-05-05 ·cited 48×
  The court held that evidence of a prior arrest for marijuana possession, even with an acquittal, was admissible to prove knowledge and intent in a subsequent drug possession trial.
• United States v. Czarnecki
  552 F.2d 698· 6th Cir.· 1977-04-01 ·cited 48×
  The court held that testimony regarding other employment between the defendant and a witness was admissible, and that the statutory definition of 'extension of credit' encompassed gambling debts.
• United States v. Zarattini
  552 F.2d 753· 7th Cir.· 1977-03-30 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the grand jury process was not abused, discovery rules were followed, evidentiary rulings were proper, and jury instructions were adequate, leading to the affirmance of the convictions.
• United States v. Coppola
  526 F.2d 764· 10th Cir.· 1975-12-08 ·cited 48×
  The court held that hearsay statements of a co-defendant, when adopted by the defendant, are admissible as party admissions, and that evidence of other crimes is admissible to prove motive.
• United States v. Jenkins
  525 F.2d 819· 6th Cir.· 1975-11-12 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the affidavit was sufficient to establish probable cause for the search warrant, and evidentiary rulings were not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Brown
  453 F.2d 101· 8th Cir.· 1971-11-30 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the admissibility of evidence of other crimes requires a case-by-case balancing of probative value against prejudicial effect.
• United States v. Merrill
  513 F.3d 1293· 11th Cir.· 2008-01-17 ·cited 47×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the defendant's convictions for wire fraud, health care fraud, and illegally prescribing narcotics. The court found sufficient evidence to support the convictions, particularly regarding the deaths resulting from the defendant's prescriptions. The co
• United States v. Drew
  894 F.2d 965· 8th Cir.· 1990-01-17 ·cited 47×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that co-conspirator statements were admissible, the evidence was sufficient to support convictions, and the trial court did not err in admitting evidence or instructing the jury.
• United States v. Ladd
  885 F.2d 954· 1st Cir.· 1989-09-13 ·cited 47×
  The Court held that while the admission of certain laboratory test results was erroneous due to a broken chain of custody, this error was harmless because other evidence sufficiently proved the defendant's guilt. The Court also found no reversible error in the admission of eviden
• United States v. Scop
  846 F.2d 135· 2d Cir.· 1988-05-04 ·cited 47×
  Expert testimony that embodies legal conclusions and is based on the expert's assessment of the credibility of other witnesses is inadmissible.