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. Kuldip Singh Mundi
  892 F.2d 817· 9th Cir.· 1989-12-21 ·cited 23×
  The court affirmed convictions for wire fraud and conspiracy but reversed one count of selling stolen property due to significant confusion regarding the applicable statute and jury instructions.
• Outley v. The City OF NEW York
  837 F.2d 587· 2d Cir.· 1988-01-25 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by precluding eyewitness testimony due to a discovery violation and by admitting evidence of prior lawsuits, which was unduly prejudicial.
• United States v. Satterfield
  644 F.2d 1092· 5th Cir.· 1981-05-14 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of a prior similar offense, denying a motion for continuance, instructing the jury on ignorance of the law, or denying a motion to suppress incriminating statements.
• United States v. Ransom Patrick Cross
  638 F.2d 1375· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-13 ·cited 23×
  The court held that inconsistent statements, only one of which was made under oath, are insufficient to support a conviction for making false material declarations. It also held that while the government's contact with the defendant without his counsel was improper, it did not wa
• United States v. Herzberg
  558 F.2d 1219· 5th Cir.· 1977-09-12 ·cited 23×
  The court held that while cross-examination regarding a prior civil fraud judgment was improper impeachment on a collateral matter, the error was harmless due to overwhelming evidence of guilt. The court also found the admission of rebuttal testimony regarding the defendant's rep
• United States v. Lennartz
  948 F.2d 363· 7th Cir.· 1991-11-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of prior uncharged misconduct under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), in giving a conscious avoidance instruction, or in finding sufficient evidence to support the mail fraud convictions.
• United States v. Lokey
  945 F.2d 825· 5th Cir.· 1991-10-10 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the evidence supported a single conspiracy and that the admission of evidence predating the indictment's timeframe was permissible.
• United States v. Sabatino
  943 F.2d 94· 1st Cir.· 1991-08-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying severance, that sufficient evidence supported the convictions, that evidentiary rulings were proper or harmless, and that sentencing adjustments for obstruction of justice and leading role were appropriate, but vacated
• United States v. Gonzalez-Lira
  936 F.2d 184· 5th Cir.· 1991-07-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior smuggling attempt, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• United States v. Feinman
  930 F.2d 495· 6th Cir.· 1991-04-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in departing upward from the defendant's criminal history category based on factors already accounted for in the Sentencing Guidelines.
• Arcoren v. United States
  929 F.2d 1235· 8th Cir.· 1991-04-08 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the admission of battered woman syndrome expert testimony was proper under Rule 702 to help the jury understand the victim's recantation, and that the admission of prior bad acts evidence was permissible under Rule 404(b). However, the court vacated the convic
• Davis v. Mason Cnty.
  927 F.2d 1473· 9th Cir.· 1991-03-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the sheriff is not the final policymaker for deputy training under Washington law, and the jury instructions on municipal liability did not meet the deliberate indifference standard required by Canton v. Harris.
• United States v. van Dorn
  925 F.2d 1331· 11th Cir.· 1991-03-11 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in restricting cross-examination of a government witness regarding his prior drug prosecution and alleged threats, nor in admitting testimony about a defendant's affiliation with the Gambino crime family and expe
• United States v. Hatch
  926 F.2d 387· 5th Cir.· 1991-02-28 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict against Hatch and affirmed Averitt's sentence, finding the upward departure from the Sentencing Guidelines justified.
• Doty v. Sewall
  908 F.2d 1053· 1st Cir.· 1990-07-17 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the district court's judgment on most issues, finding no abuse of discretion in evidentiary rulings or denial of a new trial, but reversed the denial of prejudgment interest on state law claims.
• United States v. Mendoza
  876 F.2d 639· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-31 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences, holding that Mendoza's sentence was not cruel and unusual punishment, the mandatory minimum penalties were constitutional, the evidence supported a single conspiracy, severance was not warranted, and any error in admitting other crime
• United States v. Prati
  861 F.2d 82· 5th Cir.· 1988-11-16 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions and sentences, holding that the warrantless search of the briefcase was permissible under the Fourth Amendment and that consecutive sentences for conspiracy and possession were appropriate.
• United States v. Chenault
  844 F.2d 1124· 5th Cir.· 1988-04-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that statements made by the defendant to FBI agents were admissible as they were not obtained in violation of Miranda rights or involuntarily, and that extrinsic evidence of selling pallets was admissible to prove intent.
• United States v. Rivera-Medina
  845 F.2d 12· 1st Cir.· 1988-04-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the appellant of Hobbs Act violations and that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of other crimes or the witnesses' prior convictions.
• United States v. Martinez-Nava
  838 F.2d 411· 10th Cir.· 1988-01-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that defendants' convictions were valid, rejecting all their appellate contentions regarding jury selection, supplemental jury instructions, admission of testimony, and prosecutorial misconduct.
• United States v. Mittleider
  835 F.2d 769· 10th Cir.· 1987-12-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the government sufficiently proved the defendant was a fugitive from justice and that the trial court did not err in admitting partially inaudible tape recordings, allowing jury transcripts, or giving a jury instruction on knowledge.
• United States v. Tedder
  801 F.2d 1437· 4th Cir.· 1986-09-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the attorney-client privilege did not apply to communications made to a colleague who was not acting as a legal advisor and where confidentiality was not reasonably expected. It also found sufficient evidence for conspiracy and fraud convictions and that multi
• United States v. Robinson
  782 F.2d 128· 8th Cir.· 1986-01-23 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for aiding and abetting mail theft, and the in-court identification did not deny the defendant a fair trial.
• United States v. Fesler
  781 F.2d 384· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in its jury instructions for involuntary manslaughter by failing to define 'due caution and circumspection,' requiring vacation of those convictions. However, other convictions and sentences were affirmed.
• United States v. Smith Grading & Paving, Inc.
  760 F.2d 527· 4th Cir.· 1985-04-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that extrinsic evidence of prior bad acts, offered for a purpose other than proving character and more probative than prejudicial, is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) even if it could also be excluded under Federal Rule of Evidence 608(b).
• Wegerer v. First Commodity Corp. OF Boston
  744 F.2d 719· 10th Cir.· 1984-09-10 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the majority erred in finding sufficient evidence for conspiracy and applying the alter ego doctrine to establish personal jurisdiction over the individual defendants.
• United States v. Faymore
  736 F.2d 328· 6th Cir.· 1984-06-06 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the imposition of consecutive sentences for multiple drug offenses did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause, and that the trial court's jury instructions and evidentiary rulings were proper.
• United States v. McCOLLUM
  732 F.2d 1419· 9th Cir.· 1984-05-08 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge argues that the trial court erred in admitting a prior conviction under Rule 609 and that this error was not harmless, as the majority found.
• United States v. Terry
  729 F.2d 1063· 6th Cir.· 1984-03-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting tape-recorded conversations and evidence of prior misconduct, and that the defendants' other alleged trial errors did not warrant reversal.
• Morris v. Wash. Metro. Area Transit Auth.
  702 F.2d 1037· D.C. Cir.· 1983-03-08 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial judge erred in excluding evidence of the employer's retaliatory actions against the plaintiff and other employees, requiring a new trial.
• United States v. Wooten
  688 F.2d 941· 4th Cir.· 1982-09-03 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence for importation and possession, rejecting claims of prosecutorial misconduct, and interpreting the Speedy Trial Act's minimum trial period.
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Joseph
  685 F.2d 857· 3d Cir.· 1982-07-23 ·cited 22×
  The majority holds that the jury's receipt of the defendant's written statement, along with the improper submission of another letter, constitutes reversible error mandating a new trial.
• United States v. Kovic
  684 F.2d 512· 7th Cir.· 1982-07-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court's evidentiary rulings did not improperly penalize the defendant's right to testify, and that the Chicago Police Department could be considered an 'enterprise' under RICO.
• United States v. Puckett
  692 F.2d 663· 10th Cir.· 1982-07-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the wire fraud convictions, that Krown's double jeopardy claim failed, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary or procedural rulings.
• United States v. Clemons
  676 F.2d 122· 5th Cir.· 1982-05-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that evidence of a second drug transaction, including the defendant's statement, was admissible to prove identity and was not substantially outweighed by prejudice.
• United States v. Kibler
  667 F.2d 452· 4th Cir.· 1982-01-08 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge believes venue for the substantive offense lay solely in the District of Columbia, making the trial in Maryland reversible error.
• United States v. Scott
  659 F.2d 585· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-19 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for fraudulent tax returns and witness intimidation, and that the joinder of these counts was proper.
• United States v. Mack
  643 F.2d 1119· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that evidence of a subsequent drug sale was admissible to rebut an entrapment defense, and prosecutorial remarks, while inappropriate, were harmless error.
• United States v. DeJOHN
  638 F.2d 1048· 7th Cir.· 1981-01-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the admission of 'bad acts' evidence, limitations on cross-examination, denial of a motion for acquittal, refusal of certain jury instructions, and the sentencing structure did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Bosley
  615 F.2d 1274· 9th Cir.· 1980-04-02 ·cited 22×
  The court held that admitting extrinsic evidence of a specific act solely to impeach a witness's credibility, after the witness denied the act on cross-examination, was prejudicial error under Fed.R.Evid. 608(b).
• United States v. Gubelman
  571 F.2d 1252· 2d Cir.· 1978-02-24 ·cited 22×
  Evidence of prior similar acts is inadmissible to prove identity unless the acts share unique, distinguishing characteristics, not just general similarity.
• United States v. Harawese Rhennae Moore
  556 F.2d 479· 10th Cir.· 1977-06-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not err in denying motions to dismiss, for a bill of particulars, or to suppress evidence of a prior conviction.
• United States v. Mendez
  117 F.3d 480· 11th Cir.· 1997-07-21 ·cited 21×
  The appellate court affirmed the convictions for assaulting a mail carrier with intent to steal mail (Counts I and II) but vacated the convictions for possession of stolen mail (Counts III and IV). The court found that under the circumstances, possession of stolen mail was a less
• United States v. Benson
  941 F.2d 598· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-27 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the admission of the government's expert witness testimony regarding the analysis of the transaction and its tax consequences was not manifestly erroneous. The dissent also disagreed with the majority's rejection of the harmless error doctrine.
• United States v. Perkins
  937 F.2d 1397· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-01 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its evidentiary rulings, and while an instruction on change of appearance was improper, it constituted harmless error. Therefore, the conviction is affirmed.
• United States v. Sanders
  928 F.2d 940· 10th Cir.· 1991-03-19 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove the "design to conceal or disguise" element required for money laundering convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1)(B)(i) for two car purchases.
• Pittsley v. Sergeant Philip Warish
  927 F.2d 3· 1st Cir.· 1991-02-27 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the police officers' actions and statements, while potentially wrongful, did not rise to the level of a constitutional violation actionable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and therefore, the directed verdicts for the defendants were appropriate.
• United States v. Elizondo
  920 F.2d 1308· 7th Cir.· 1990-11-02 ·cited 21×
  The court held that while the prosecution's questioning of a defendant regarding an accident report was improper and lacked a good faith factual basis, it did not constitute reversible error or plain error given the totality of the evidence. The court also found the abbreviated P
• United States v. Martin
  897 F.2d 1368· 6th Cir.· 1990-03-01 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the admission of hearsay testimony regarding the defendant's prior criminal acts was improper and violated the Confrontation Clause, and that this error was not harmless.
• United States v. Onel Colon
  880 F.2d 650· 2d Cir.· 1989-07-14 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court erred in admitting evidence of prior similar acts because the defendant's defense theory, asserting a lack of recollection of the event, removed the issue of intent from dispute.