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. Osum
  943 F.2d 1394· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-25 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the transfer of the case was within the district court's discretion, the admission of evidence of subsequent uncharged offenses was proper, the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, and the use of a summary witness was
• United States v. Desmarais
  938 F.2d 347· 1st Cir.· 1991-07-17 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the conviction and forfeiture, holding that the trial court did not err in bifurcating the trials, admitting evidence of a prior suspicious package, denying motions for acquittal, or in its jury instructions regarding forfeiture.
• United States v. Hill
  953 F.2d 452· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding the defendant's prior cocaine use was reversible error because it constituted inadmissible character evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and was not harmless error.
• United States v. Jenkins
  928 F.2d 1175· D.C. Cir.· 1991-03-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict against Jenkins, and rejected Stephens' sufficiency-of-the-evidence and severance claims.
• United States v. Mushtaq Malik
  928 F.2d 17· 1st Cir.· 1991-03-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in limiting cross-examination regarding the defendant's alleged affiliations with terrorist organizations, nor in admitting evidence of prior bad acts or the meaning of an alias, as these rulings were within the court's discretion a
• United States v. COX
  923 F.2d 519· 7th Cir.· 1991-01-22 ·cited 14×
  A district court has discretion to reject a guilty plea, even an Alford plea, if the defendant protests innocence and the court has concerns about systemic legitimacy. The court also affirmed the use of a Santiago proffer procedure, even if ex parte, when it does not prejudice th
• United States v. Todd
  920 F.2d 399· 6th Cir.· 1990-12-04 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the conviction but remanded for resentencing, holding that a coordinate court is not bound by prior evidentiary rulings from a mistrial and that the district court's reasons for departing from sentencing guidelines were inadequate.
• United States v. Dobynes
  905 F.2d 1192· 8th Cir.· 1990-06-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting other crimes evidence, physical evidence, or in its jury instructions, and that the Batson claim was untimely and not plain error. The refusal to depart from sentencing guidelines was also affirmed.
• United States v. McCONNELL
  903 F.2d 566· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the warrantless, nonconsensual entry of a hotel room violated the Fourth Amendment rights of the occupant.
• United States v. Jones
  900 F.2d 512· 2d Cir.· 1990-03-30 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the convictions for false declarations and obstruction of justice but vacated the sentence, finding insufficient evidence to support the Sentencing Guidelines enhancement for substantially interfering with the administration of justice.
• United States v. Thunder
  893 F.2d 950· 8th Cir.· 1990-01-11 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed convictions for kidnapping and sexual abuse but vacated the sentence for sexual abuse due to material misinformation regarding abduction, remanding for resentencing.
• United States v. Lee Hitow (88-1970)
  889 F.2d 1573· 6th Cir.· 1989-11-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict appellants of conspiracy to distribute marijuana and that the district court did not err in admitting certain evidence or in its rulings on prosecutorial remarks and sentencing.
• United States v. Garbett
  867 F.2d 1132· 8th Cir.· 1989-02-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court properly admitted co-conspirator statements and evidence of other crimes, but erred in admitting evidence of a prior conviction, though this was harmless error. The court also found plain error regarding defense counsel's statement and reman
• United States v. Yaffa Levy
  865 F.2d 551· 3d Cir.· 1989-01-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that there was sufficient independent evidence to admit co-conspirator statements under the Ammar standard and that the use of false passports and identities was admissible. However, sentences for two defendants were vacated due to potential sentencing misunderstan
• United States v. Rivera Constr. Co. Appeal of Rivera Constr. Co., Inc.
  863 F.2d 293· 3d Cir.· 1988-12-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court adequately placed the reasons for granting a continuance on the record, satisfying the Speedy Trial Act, and that the appellate court lacked jurisdiction to review the appointment of a receiver due to an insufficient notice of appeal.
• United States v. Maichle
  861 F.2d 178· 8th Cir.· 1988-11-01 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of prior drug-related acts to prove intent and in ruling that a ten-year-old conviction could be used for impeachment.
• Herbert v. State
  526 So. 2d 709· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-05-11 ·cited 14×
  Rose Herbert was convicted of aggravated child abuse by malicious punishment for striking her 7-year-old son with a belt after he took money from her. The Fourth District reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding the evidence insufficient to prove malicious punishment and ho
• United States v. Gordon
  812 F.2d 965· 5th Cir.· 1987-03-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a battered wife's statements and Miranda waivers were voluntary, and that the codefendant's trial errors did not warrant reversal.
• United States v. Eldridge V. Black
  776 F.2d 1321· 6th Cir.· 1985-11-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the immunity agreement did not protect the defendant from prosecution for perjury and obstruction of justice, as these are distinct offenses not covered by the immunity grant.
• United States v. Touloumis
  771 F.2d 235· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting certain evidence or in its jury instructions.
• United States v. Percy
  765 F.2d 1199· 4th Cir.· 1985-06-27 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no error in the denial of a competency examination, the admission of prior bad acts evidence, or the prosecutor's comments.
• United States v. Hoelscher
  764 F.2d 491· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict for conspiracy and aiding and abetting distribution of cocaine, and that evidence from other counts was properly considered for identification.
• United States v. Winn
  767 F.2d 527· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the admission of appellant's prior conviction and hearsay statements from illegal aliens was not an abuse of discretion and did not violate his constitutional rights.
• United States v. Hurley
  755 F.2d 788· 11th Cir.· 1985-03-19 ·cited 14×
  Evidence of post-escape contacts was admissible to prove intent for aiding and abetting an escape.
• United States v. Mergist
  738 F.2d 645· 5th Cir.· 1984-07-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court's failure to hold an evidentiary hearing on the voluntariness of accomplice testimony was harmless error, and the admission of extrinsic offense evidence was proper in a conspiracy case where intent remained a material issue.
• United States v. O'Leary
  739 F.2d 135· 3d Cir.· 1984-07-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting testimony about prior drug transactions under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) because it was relevant for permissible purposes and its probative value was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudic
• United States v. Horvath
  731 F.2d 557· 8th Cir.· 1984-04-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while the admission of evidence concerning a marijuana seizure at Ardmore, Oklahoma was improper, it constituted harmless error, and the admission of attorney-client communications made in furtherance of a criminal conspiracy was also proper.
• United States v. Braithwaite
  709 F.2d 1450· 11th Cir.· 1983-07-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellants' contentions lacked merit, affirming their convictions.
• United States v. Dysart
  705 F.2d 1247· 10th Cir.· 1983-04-11 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting the testimony of Dr. Leach, in its jury instructions, or in admitting evidence of prior threats, and that the defendant waived certain objections by failing to raise them timely.
• United States v. Rossbach
  701 F.2d 713· 8th Cir.· 1983-03-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit prejudicial error in its rulings regarding the indictment, voir dire, disqualification of counsel, conflict of interest, leading questions, severance, or admission of flight evidence.
• United States v. Whitman
  665 F.2d 313· 10th Cir.· 1981-11-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that amendments to the indictment narrowing the charges were permissible, the evidence was sufficient to prove intent, the jury instructions were adequate, evidentiary rulings were proper, and the prosecutor's rebuttal argument did not constitute an improper commen
• Tigges v. Nunzio Cataldo
  611 F.2d 936· 1st Cir.· 1979-12-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in preventing cross-examination regarding prior disciplinary actions and in its jury instructions on lawful arrest authority.
• United States v. Artemio Arthur Angelini
  607 F.2d 1305· 9th Cir.· 1979-11-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that evidence of prior warnings to the defendant about needing a dealer's license was admissible to show intent to engage in the business of dealing firearms, even if the crime was one of general intent.
• United States v. Smith
  605 F.2d 839· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's late request for a free transcript of a prior mistrial, nor was the introduction of the defendant's guilty plea and references to his criminal record improper or prejudicial.
• United States v. Walton
  602 F.2d 1176· 4th Cir.· 1979-07-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting marijuana into evidence despite its partial disappearance, and that while denying defense access to a key witness in protective custody was error, it was harmless. The convictions are affirmed.
• United States v. Viruet
  539 F.2d 295· 2d Cir.· 1976-08-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that knowledge of interstate commerce status of goods is not required for conspiracy conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 659.
• In re Korean AIR Lines Disaster OF September 1
  932 F.2d 1475· D.C. Cir.· 1991-05-07 ·cited 13×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find willful misconduct, but vacated the punitive damages award.
• United States v. Arvil A. Hill
  898 F.2d 72· 7th Cir.· 1990-03-19 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to independently determine the constitutionality of the search conducted by state officers in Missouri before admitting evidence from that search. The case is remanded for this determination.
• United States v. Miller
  895 F.2d 1431· D.C. Cir.· 1990-02-06 ·cited 13×
  The court held that evidence of a defendant's prior conviction can be admissible to show a witness's state of mind (e.g., fear) and that the erroneous admission of such evidence was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Ramirez
  894 F.2d 565· 2d Cir.· 1990-01-24 ·cited 13×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that similar act evidence was properly admitted, hearsay was correctly excluded, and the jury instruction on flight was adequate.
• United States v. Valentin Eufracio-Torres
  890 F.2d 266· 10th Cir.· 1989-11-22 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting deposition testimony of unavailable witnesses and prior convictions for illegal entry, as the government made reasonable efforts to secure attendance and the prior convictions were relevant to knowledge.
• United States v. Ricks
  882 F.2d 885· 4th Cir.· 1989-08-18 ·cited 13×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that collateral estoppel did not apply due to different sovereigns, the search warrant was valid, and evidentiary rulings and jury instructions were proper.
• Morfeld v. Kehm
  803 F.2d 1452· 8th Cir.· 1986-10-29 ·cited 13×
  The court held that a directed verdict granted solely on the plaintiff's opening statement, based on the plaintiff's failure to list the defendant as a witness, was an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Atwell
  766 F.2d 416· 10th Cir.· 1985-06-24 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination, admitting evidence of uncharged crimes, and that no Brady violation occurred as the issue was not preserved.
• United States v. Troya
  733 F.3d 1125· 11th Cir.· 2013-10-02 ·cited 12×
  Daniel Troya and Ricardo Sanchez, Jr. were convicted of murdering the Escobedo family, including two young children, in connection with a drug trafficking operation and sentenced to death. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed their convictions and sentences, rejecting most appellate cha
• United States v. Miller
  974 F.2d 953· 8th Cir.· 1992-08-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the use of handcuffs during an investigative stop was reasonable, and a defendant's abandonment of a bag negated a Fourth Amendment claim. It also affirmed the denial of severance motions based on a redacted confession and the admission of prior bad acts evide
• United States v. Carpenter
  963 F.2d 736· 5th Cir.· 1992-06-09 ·cited 12×
  The Sixth Amendment right to counsel in an unrelated state case does not automatically invoke the Fifth Amendment right to counsel for federal interrogations, and evidence of a crack pipe found with a firearm is admissible to corroborate a recanted confession.
• United States v. Emrolyn Kae Whitetail
  956 F.2d 857· 8th Cir.· 1992-02-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in believing it could not consider battered-woman syndrome as a basis for sentencing departure after the jury rejected it as a self-defense claim.
• United States v. Brown
  956 F.2d 782· 8th Cir.· 1992-02-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the convictions and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of other bad acts or prior convictions.
• United States v. Felix-Gutierrez
  940 F.2d 1200· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a defendant can be prosecuted in the United States for being an accessory after the fact to crimes committed abroad, provided the underlying offense is subject to extraterritorial application and the accessory's conduct has sufficient nexus to U.S. interests.