Federal Rule Of Evidence 404(B)

1,318 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 7 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• United States v. Peterson
  808 F.2d 969· 2d Cir.· 1987-01-06 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the admission of the 'Williams check' evidence was an abuse of discretion because its probative value for knowledge and credibility was substantially outweighed by its potential for prejudice, and the error was not harmless.
• United States v. Ebens
  800 F.2d 1422· 6th Cir.· 1986-09-11 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the erroneous exclusion of impeachment evidence regarding key government witnesses constituted reversible error, requiring a new trial. The court also found the admission of prior bad acts testimony to be reversible error.
• United States v. Hosford
  782 F.2d 936· 11th Cir.· 1986-02-19 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the prosecutor's involvement in the defendant's immunity agreement did not violate due process, and the admission of prior bad acts evidence was harmless error.
• United States v. Wright
  783 F.2d 1091· D.C. Cir.· 1986-02-18 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the convictions of both defendants, finding no abuse of discretion in denying severance motions and no substantial prejudice from evidentiary rulings.
• United States v. George
  752 F.2d 749· 1st Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 26×
  The court held that while the jury verdict of guilt for conspiracy to manufacture amphetamine stands, the concurrent sentences on multiple conspiracy counts were improper and require resentencing.
• United States v. Falco
  727 F.2d 659· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-13 ·cited 26×
  The dissenting judge believes the admission of prior convictions was an abuse of discretion due to their minimal probative value and high prejudicial effect.
• United States v. Lucero
  601 F.2d 1147· 10th Cir.· 1979-07-20 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the admission of tape recordings referencing narcotics transactions, the use of government-prepared transcripts, the jury instruction regarding 'on or about' dates, and the sufficiency of the evidence were not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. Digeronimo
  598 F.2d 746· 2d Cir.· 1979-05-03 ·cited 26×
  Convictions for receiving and possessing stolen goods are multiplicitous with Hobbs Act robbery convictions when the possession is of the goods stolen in the robbery, and thus must be vacated. Other convictions are affirmed.
• United States v. Weaver
  565 F.2d 129· 8th Cir.· 1977-10-31 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction for aiding and abetting an armed bank robbery was supported by sufficient evidence and that his constitutional rights were not violated by pre-indictment delay, speedy trial issues, or the admission of other crimes evidence.
• United States v. Krohn
  560 F.2d 293· 7th Cir.· 1977-08-12 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a violation of the Speedy Trial Act's interim limits does not warrant dismissal of the indictment, and evidence of other acts is admissible to show a common scheme or plan. Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and improper admission of evidence were als
• United States v. Cavallaro
  553 F.2d 300· 2d Cir.· 1977-04-19 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove interstate kidnapping, that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague, that the trial court did not err in limiting questioning about a witness's address, and that evidence of a subsequent crime was admissible.
• United States v. McFADYEN-Snider
  552 F.2d 1178· 6th Cir.· 1977-04-15 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the admission of irrelevant and prejudicial evidence regarding the defendant's alleged prostitution and unrelated bad checks constituted reversible error, denying the defendant a fair trial.
• United States v. Alfonzo Cain
  544 F.2d 1113· 1st Cir.· 1976-11-15 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the prosecutor's remarks were not improper expressions of personal belief and that the evidence was sufficient. The court also found no reversible error in the trial court's handling of other issues raised on appeal.
• United States v. Sonntag
  684 F.2d 781· 11th Cir.· 1982-09-01 ·cited 25×
  The court held that evidence seized during a drug transaction at a defendant's home was admissible under consent search doctrine, searches of wallets incident to arrest were valid, the jury instructions on entrapment were sufficient, and evidentiary rulings were not an abuse of d
• United States v. Bowman
  602 F.2d 160· 8th Cir.· 1979-07-16 ·cited 25×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the appellant waived claims regarding severance and voir dire by failing to renew motions or object, and that evidence of other crimes was properly admitted to show intent.
• United States v. Sellers
  926 F.2d 410· 5th Cir.· 1991-03-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding prior dumping was proper, the jury instructions regarding knowledge were not plain error, and the sentencing guidelines were correctly applied.
• United States v. Castiello
  915 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1990-09-12 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the agent's interpretation of the defendant's taped admission was admissible, the entrapment defense was not improperly forced, and the statute's notice deficiency did not violate due process as the defendant was not ha
• United States v. Khorrami
  895 F.2d 1186· 7th Cir.· 1990-02-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for mailing threatening communications and that the admission of certain phone call tapes was proper.
• United States v. Fuller
  887 F.2d 144· 8th Cir.· 1989-10-05 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions and sentence, finding no reversible error in the jury selection, evidence admission, closing arguments, or sentencing.
• United States v. Bruno Mancari
  875 F.2d 103· 7th Cir.· 1989-05-05 ·cited 24×
  A codefendant's acquittal does not automatically invalidate another defendant's conviction for conspiracy, but here, the government's concessions and insufficient evidence regarding other conspirators led to reversal of the conspiracy conviction.
• United States v. Peterson
  867 F.2d 1110· 8th Cir.· 1989-02-10 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence seized during both searches was admissible, the indictments were sufficient, the sentence for solicitation was proper, the firearm counts were not duplicative, the admission of a prior conviction was not an abuse of discretion, and sufficient evid
• United States v. Zelinka
  862 F.2d 92· 6th Cir.· 1988-11-25 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of post-conspiracy cocaine possession was an abuse of discretion under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) because it was not probative of any material issue other than character and thus was inadmissible 'other crimes' evidence.
• United States v. Hall
  854 F.2d 1036· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-16 ·cited 24×
  While not strictly forbidden, judges are generally advised against defining reasonable doubt as attempts often create more confusion than clarity.
• United States v. Elliott
  849 F.2d 554· 11th Cir.· 1988-07-14 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant's arguments regarding speedy trial, governmental misconduct, evidentiary rulings, and procedural issues lacked merit.
• United States v. Wiley
  846 F.2d 150· 2d Cir.· 1988-05-06 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Reynolds' conviction for aiding and abetting the SCS wire fraud scheme, reversing that conviction. Other convictions were affirmed.
• United States v. Poschwatta
  829 F.2d 1477· 9th Cir.· 1987-10-13 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for failure to file income tax returns and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings or procedural decisions.
• United States v. Bentley
  825 F.2d 1104· 7th Cir.· 1987-06-24 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding that the defendants participated in a scheme to defraud, and that the search warrant was sufficiently particular given the nature of the fraudulent business.
• United States v. Giraldo
  822 F.2d 205· 2d Cir.· 1987-06-04 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the defendant was not denied a fair trial by the mid-trial sentencing of a co-conspirator, nor were tape recordings improperly admitted or used.
• United States v. Salim Fakhoury
  819 F.2d 1415· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-26 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the appellant's convictions, finding sufficient evidence for attempted arson and mail fraud, and that the admission of prior misconduct evidence and prosecutorial remarks did not deny a fair trial.
• United States v. ST. Pierre
  812 F.2d 417· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-03 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or in failing to appoint expert witnesses.
• United States v. Bass
  794 F.2d 1305· 8th Cir.· 1986-07-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that separate convictions for transporting stolen firearms and being a felon in possession of firearms do not violate double jeopardy, but sentencing for one offense under the penalty provision of another is improper.
• United States v. Dearld Gene Davis
  780 F.2d 838· 10th Cir.· 1985-12-19 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence for the Travel Act violation, no Fifth Amendment violation from grand jury testimony, lawful admission of wiretapped conversations, admissible tape recordings, and properly admitted evidence against both defendants.
• United States v. Eirin
  778 F.2d 722· 11th Cir.· 1985-12-19 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting Botero's post-arrest statements, coconspirator statements, or evidence of other money laundering schemes, and that the denial of severance motions and claims of judicial/prosecutorial misconduct were also without mer
• United States v. Dunn
  758 F.2d 30· 1st Cir.· 1985-03-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of evidence concerning a second extortion attempt did not constructively amend the indictment and was admissible under the co-conspirator exception to hearsay, and did not violate the Confrontation Clause.
• Kerr v. First Commodity Corp. OF Boston
  735 F.2d 281· 8th Cir.· 1984-05-09 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Commodities Exchange Act does not preempt common law fraud claims for punitive damages and that the admission of prior similar conduct evidence was proper for showing intent and knowledge.
• United States v. Punch
  722 F.2d 146· 5th Cir.· 1983-12-23 ·cited 24×
  A district court's failure to address a timely asserted conflict of interest by counsel, including refusing to allow withdrawal or hold required hearings, violates the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Brown
  720 F.2d 1059· 9th Cir.· 1983-11-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of Sergeant McNabb's testimony, which recounted statements made by appellant Jackson during a custodial street confrontation, was prejudicial error violating Miranda and Rule 403, requiring reversal.
• United States v. Krezdorn
  718 F.2d 1360· 5th Cir.· 1983-11-10 ·cited 24×
  A prima facie case of prosecutorial vindictiveness can be rebutted by showing that the prosecutor's decision to add charges was motivated by a desire to cure an evidentiary error identified on appeal, rather than to punish the defendant for exercising his appellate rights.
• Phillips v. Smalley Maint. Servs., Inc.
  711 F.2d 1524· 11th Cir.· 1983-08-15 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment, holding that sexual harassment constitutes an unlawful employment practice under Title VII and that Alabama law recognizes a cause of action for tortious invasion of privacy.
• United States v. Richardo Torres
  685 F.2d 921· 5th Cir.· 1982-08-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of sample drug transactions and co-conspirator statements was proper, and that Reinosa's post-arrest statement was admissible.
• United States v. Harper
  680 F.2d 731· 11th Cir.· 1982-07-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to sever offenses, that an in-court identification was not impermissibly tainted, that the government's attorney did not improperly assist an identification, and that there was sufficient ev
• United States v. Bocra
  623 F.2d 281· 3d Cir.· 1980-05-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in limiting discovery and excluding evidence of other bribery cases involving the IRS agent, nor did it err in refusing to find entrapment as a matter of law.
• United States v. Miroff
  606 F.2d 777· 7th Cir.· 1979-10-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the denial of the motion to suppress was proper because the defendants assumed the risk of the search of their shared room by assuring the hosts that no stolen property was present, and that evidence of other criminal activity and details of the robbery were a
• United States v. Algarin
  584 F.2d 562· 1st Cir.· 1978-09-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that even if the government improperly withheld information about a plea agreement with a key witness, the defendant is not entitled to a new trial because the evidence against him was overwhelming and the undisclosed information would not have reasonably affected
• United States v. Silva
  580 F.2d 144· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-13 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to order disclosure of the confidential informant's identity and in admitting testimony of subsequent acts.
• United States v. Carrillo
  561 F.2d 1125· 5th Cir.· 1977-10-31 ·cited 24×
  The court held that evidence of state law violations was admissible to prove tax fraud and that a codefendant's statement, even if hearsay, was harmless error.
• United States v. Johnson
  562 F.2d 515· 8th Cir.· 1977-08-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing an absent witness instruction, admitting evidence of other wrongdoing to prove knowledge, or admitting an oral statement not disclosed under Rule 16.
• United States v. Dudek
  560 F.2d 1288· 6th Cir.· 1977-08-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse discretion admitting evidence of other crimes under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b).
• United States v. DeVINCENT
  546 F.2d 452· 1st Cir.· 1976-12-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the jury instructions, when read as a whole, adequately conveyed the statutory requirements for proving an extortionate extension of credit, and that the admission of certain evidence was not reversible error.
• United States v. Fairchild
  526 F.2d 185· 7th Cir.· 1975-11-25 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no violation of the speedy trial right and upholding the denial of the motion to suppress evidence from a warrantless arrest.