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. Brooks
  567 F.2d 134· D.C. Cir.· 1977-11-10 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in its voir dire, refusal of an entrapment instruction, denial of severance, or admission of a videotaped statement.
• United States v. Scharf
  558 F.2d 498· 8th Cir.· 1977-07-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of altered records, summary exhibits, or in refusing lesser included offense instructions, and that the sentences imposed were not excessive.
• United States v. Herndon
  982 F.2d 1411· 10th Cir.· 1992-12-08 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the admission of similar acts evidence was not plain error, that a stipulation to forfeiture did not require the procedural safeguards of a guilty plea under Rule 11, and that the district court did not commit plain error in valuing the stolen vehicle at the t
• United States v. Aranda
  963 F.2d 211· 8th Cir.· 1992-05-01 ·cited 11×
  Evidence of a prior drug seizure during the conspiracy period is admissible as direct evidence of the charged conspiracy, not as inadmissible 'other crimes' evidence under Rule 404(b).
• United States v. Goodapple
  958 F.2d 1402· 7th Cir.· 1992-03-16 ·cited 11×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on the admissibility of evidence, the prosecutor's remarks, or the decision to try the case in federal court.
• United States v. Isabel
  945 F.2d 1193· 1st Cir.· 1991-09-10 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the amendment of the indictment's statutory citation was not prejudicial, the admission of certain testimony was proper, the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, and the sentencing decision was not erroneous.
• United States v. Butcher
  926 F.2d 811· 9th Cir.· 1991-02-06 ·cited 11×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the arrest was lawful, the admission of evidence of narcotics and other firearms was proper, the jury instructions were adequate, surrebuttal testimony was cumulative, and the sentence enhancement based on prior convictions was vali
• United States v. Tripp
  782 F.2d 38· 6th Cir.· 1986-01-16 ·cited 11×
  The court held that evidence of other card games was admissible as part of the conspiracy, that 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d) does not require proof of overt acts, that the RICO statute is not unconstitutionally vague, and that rigged poker games constitute gambling under state law.
• United States v. Walker
  710 F.2d 1062· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-15 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the admission of extrinsic acts evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) was proper, as it was relevant to issues other than character and its probative value was not substantially outweighed by prejudice, and that other contentions raised by the defenda
• United States v. Forsythe
  594 F.2d 947· 3d Cir.· 1979-02-15 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of uncharged crimes in rebuttal to character evidence was prejudicial error, requiring reversal of the convictions.
• United States v. Arambula-Ruiz
  987 F.2d 599· 9th Cir.· 1993-03-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of a prior drug conviction for knowledge and intent was proper under Rule 404(b), and co-conspirator statements were admissible under Rule 801(d)(2)(E); errors in admitting prior arrests were harmless, and no Bruton error occurred.
• United States v. Garcia
  983 F.2d 1160· 1st Cir.· 1993-02-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, the district judge did not err in vacating the magistrate's order compelling the informant's attendance, and the judge did not err in refusing to suppress evidence or statements.
• United States v. Aversa
  984 F.2d 493· 1st Cir.· 1993-01-13 ·cited 10×
  The court's announced standard for currency law violations is sufficiently close to the subjective standard in Cheek to avoid punishing those with an innocent state of mind.
• United States v. Wint
  974 F.2d 961· 8th Cir.· 1992-08-28 ·cited 10×
  District judges retain discretion to depart upward or downward from guideline sentences when commentaries do not fully describe offender conduct or background. Appeals courts should affirm such departures.
• United States v. Arias-Montoya
  967 F.2d 708· 1st Cir.· 1992-06-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of a defendant's prior drug conviction was permissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) to establish knowledge, even if propensity was a factor in the inference.
• United States v. McGLORY
  968 F.2d 309· 3d Cir.· 1992-06-19 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentence, but the concurring opinion questions the sufficiency of coded conversations as evidence and analyzes the ambiguity in sentencing under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A).
• United States v. Elvis Leonidas Ruiz-Batista
  956 F.2d 351· 1st Cir.· 1992-02-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of prior instances of cocaine possession was admissible to show intent and knowledge, and the upward adjustment in sentencing based on the defendant's role in the offense was proper under the Sentencing Guidelines.
• United States v. Valentino R. Madia, Jr.
  955 F.2d 538· 8th Cir.· 1992-01-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that extending a statute of limitations before the original period expires does not violate the ex post facto clause, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b).
• United States v. Sacerio
  952 F.2d 860· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants knowingly possessed cocaine with intent to distribute or voluntarily participated in a conspiracy to do so.
• United States v. Boone
  951 F.2d 1526· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-05 ·cited 10×·via Rule 404(b)
  The court held that Dehlia Boone did not waive her right to appeal the discrepancy between the oral and written verdicts, and affirmed her conviction based on the written verdict. The court reversed Roger Swayze's perjury conviction on one count due to the literal truth of his an
• United States v. Brown
  948 F.2d 1076· 8th Cir.· 1991-11-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of the appellant's physical condition and state of mind after his last VA exam was admissible and relevant to proving his intent and motive to defraud the VA.
• United States v. Columbus Ewings
  936 F.2d 903· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of the defendant's spending of insurance proceeds was admissible to show his participation in the fraud, and that the district court had discretion to impose consecutive sentences for pre-guidelines and guidelines counts.
• United States v. Bennie Johnson
  934 F.2d 936· 8th Cir.· 1991-05-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of subsequent drug transactions under Rule 404(b) and testimony regarding Frank Noel as background information, and that these did not constructively amend the indictment.
• United States v. Treff
  924 F.2d 975· 10th Cir.· 1991-01-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's right to self-representation was not violated, his counsel's assistance was not ineffective, and the admission of evidence regarding his wife's murder and a diary entry was proper.
• United States v. Cordell
  912 F.2d 769· 5th Cir.· 1990-09-11 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge argues that the bank president's conviction for making a false entry and willful misapplication of bank funds is unwarranted.
• United States v. Marashi
  913 F.2d 724· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the marital communications privilege does not apply to communications made in furtherance of joint criminal activity, and that the admission of certain evidence did not violate Brady v. Maryland or Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b).
• United States v. Luffred
  911 F.2d 1011· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury's consideration of extrinsic evidence, specifically a chart excluded from evidence, tainted the verdict, entitling the defendant to a new trial.
• United States v. Sullivan
  911 F.2d 2· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting certain testimony under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict on all counts.
• United States v. Newton
  912 F.2d 212· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of prior bad acts was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and that the sentence imposed was not excessive.
• The Movie 1 & 2 v. United Artists Commc'ns, Inc.
  909 F.2d 1245· 9th Cir.· 1990-05-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in excluding evidence and granting summary judgment, as genuine issues of material fact exist regarding antitrust claims under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act.
• United States v. Fawbush
  900 F.2d 150· 8th Cir.· 1990-04-05 ·cited 10×
• United States v. Dray
  901 F.2d 1132· 1st Cir.· 1990-03-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that collateral estoppel did not bar the reintroduction of evidence related to acquitted mail fraud charges when that evidence was relevant to proving the elements of a conspiracy charge, specifically the foreseeability of mailing.
• United States v. Bettelyoun
  892 F.2d 744· 8th Cir.· 1989-12-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of hearsay radio broadcast testimony was harmless error, and the admission of evidence of a prior assault was proper as an integral part of the charged crime.
• United States v. Moskowitz
  888 F.2d 223· 2d Cir.· 1989-10-13 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions for transporting hazardous materials and possessing cocaine but remanded for resentencing due to a lesser-included offense issue.
• United States v. Miller
  883 F.2d 1540· 11th Cir.· 1989-09-25 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting extrinsic evidence of a prior drug sale to show identity, modus operandi, or intent, and alternatively, that any error was harmless.
• Lesko v. Owens
  881 F.2d 44· 3d Cir.· 1989-07-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of gruesome details of a prior murder was unduly prejudicial and violated the defendant's right to a fair trial. Additionally, the court found that a potential plea agreement violation raised serious due process concerns.
• United States v. Voigt
  877 F.2d 1465· 10th Cir.· 1989-06-07 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the appellant failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel, that the jury's verdict was not impeached by juror testimony, and that the expert witness testimony was properly admitted.
• Harris v. Lt. Dennis R. Davis
  874 F.2d 461· 7th Cir.· 1989-05-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of inflammatory evidence in a prisoner civil rights case was not harmless error, as it prejudiced the plaintiff's credibility.
• United States v. Hays
  872 F.2d 582· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in admitting a substantial amount of irrelevant, cumulative, and prejudicial evidence, which impermissibly affected the substantial rights of the defendants.
• United States v. Dakins
  872 F.2d 1061· D.C. Cir.· 1989-04-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in excluding evidence of police misconduct, accepting a partial jury verdict, or refusing to apply the rule of consistency.
• United States v. Rivera
  872 F.2d 507· 1st Cir.· 1989-04-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's re-prosecution on count two was barred by double jeopardy, but affirmed convictions on counts one and three, finding no reversible error in jury instructions or evidence admission.
• United States v. Ball
  868 F.2d 984· 8th Cir.· 1989-02-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the appellant's post-arrest statements as they were relevant to proving intent and completing the narrative of the offense.
• United States v. Don Temple
  862 F.2d 821· 10th Cir.· 1988-12-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of two 1986 incidents under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) because they were too remote and tenuous to prove the defendant's intent or common plan for the 1987 conspiracy, and their prejudicial ef
• Faison v. Nationwide Mortg. Corp.
  839 F.2d 680· D.C. Cir.· 1988-03-04 ·cited 10×
  The court granted rehearing on the issue of excessive compensatory damages, denying other issues, and remanded the cases to the trial court for evaluation of the excessive verdict claim.
• United States v. Taggatz
  831 F.2d 1355· 7th Cir.· 1987-10-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior similar scheme, that the jury instructions and verdict were proper, and that the sentence imposed was not excessive.
• United States v. Hogue
  827 F.2d 660· 10th Cir.· 1987-08-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of prior and subsequent assaults under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) because it was used to prove character and lacked a clear, logical connection to the charged offense.
• United States v. Louis
  814 F.2d 852· 2d Cir.· 1987-03-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of a co-conspirator's conviction and tape-recorded conversations was proper, and the delay caused by a motion for substitution of counsel was excludable under the Speedy Trial Act. However, the sentence was vacated due to improper ex parte consid
• United States v. Nichols
  808 F.2d 660· 8th Cir.· 1987-01-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the admission of extrinsic evidence of prior drug transactions was questionable under Rule 404(b), any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to the overwhelming evidence of guilt. Other evidentiary rulings were affirmed.
• United States v. Collatos
  798 F.2d 18· 1st Cir.· 1986-08-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the materiality of a false statement in a perjury case is a question of law, not fact, and that any prosecutorial comment on the defendant's silence was harmless error.
• Dillard v. Blackburn
  780 F.2d 509· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a habeas petitioner is not entitled to ten days' notice before dismissal if they do not claim prejudice from the lack of notice and have not shown they would have presented additional evidence.