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. Zapata
  871 F.2d 616· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-24 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior drug transaction, refusing to strike testimony after a witness invoked the Fifth Amendment, or admitting hotel registration records. Any error in the jury instruction regarding pr
• Coursen v. A.H. Robins Co., Inc.
  764 F.2d 1329· 9th Cir.· 1985-07-03 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding evidence of pregnancy rates and fraudulent reporting, nor in striking punitive damages prayers. However, the court found error in the jury instruction regarding unavoidable danger and the admission of sexual history
• United States v. Arlan Lamar Robinson
  700 F.2d 205· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-28 ·cited 88×
  The court affirmed convictions for misrepresentation but remanded for further proceedings on the extortion conviction due to insufficient record regarding the admissibility of extrinsic offense evidence.
• United States v. Evans
  697 F.2d 240· 8th Cir.· 1983-01-06 ·cited 88×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant of conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute marijuana, and that the admission of prior wrongful acts testimony was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Calabrese
  645 F.2d 1379· 10th Cir.· 1981-03-26 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the mistrial was declared out of manifest necessity, the denial of change of venue and severance motions was not an abuse of discretion, the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, and the admission of co-conspirator statements and other evidence w
• United States v. Bridwell
  583 F.2d 1135· 10th Cir.· 1978-09-11 ·cited 88×
  The court held that while the prosecutor's comment on a defendant's refusal to waive Miranda rights was an error, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also found that other alleged errors, including issues with search warrants, evidence admissibility, prosecutor a
• United States v. Harrell
  737 F.2d 971· 11th Cir.· 1984-07-30 ·cited 87×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Hawkins' conviction on the Travel Act charge (Count Three), reversing that conviction, but affirmed all other convictions and rulings.
• United States v. Hawkins
  823 F.2d 1020· 7th Cir.· 1987-06-17 ·cited 86×
  The court held that the defendant's Miranda waiver and confession were voluntary, the admission of testimony regarding his plans to trade guns for cocaine was proper, and the refusal to give an entrapment instruction was correct.
• United States v. Peltier
  585 F.2d 314· 8th Cir.· 1978-09-14 ·cited 86×
  The court held that the admission of evidence regarding Peltier's prior attempted murder charge, his flight from law enforcement in Oregon, and weapons found in an exploded vehicle was proper and did not deny him due process or a fair trial.
• United States v. Bloom
  538 F.2d 704· 5th Cir.· 1976-09-13 ·cited 86×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of other drug dealings, refusing an evidentiary hearing on wiretapping, or denying dismissal for speedy trial violations.
• United States v. Loretta Walton (89-1862)
  908 F.2d 1289· 6th Cir.· 1990-07-18 ·cited 84×
  The court held that a witness's passing, unprompted reference to a polygraph examination, followed by a curative instruction, was harmless error. It also held that the defendants did not establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination in the prosecution's use of peremptory
• United States v. Martino
  759 F.2d 998· 2d Cir.· 1985-04-03 ·cited 84×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction and that the admission of a prior conviction was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Pedroza
  750 F.2d 187· 2d Cir.· 1984-12-11 ·cited 84×
  The court held that the trial court erred in unduly curtailing the defendants' cross-examination of government witnesses regarding the victim's father's alleged consent to the abduction, requiring a new trial.
• United States v. Gordon
  780 F.2d 1165· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-16 ·cited 83×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, extrinsic evidence was properly admitted with limiting instructions, cross-examination was not unduly restricted, and inconsistent jury verdicts are permissible.
• United States v. Roberts
  619 F.2d 379· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-16 ·cited 83×
  The court held that evidence seized under the plain view doctrine was admissible and that the admission of a prior conviction to prove intent in a conspiracy case was proper.
• United States v. McKINNELL
  888 F.2d 669· 10th Cir.· 1989-10-27 ·cited 82×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the defendant's car was valid under exceptions for searches incident to arrest and probable cause, that possession with intent to distribute is a valid predicate offense for using a firearm during a drug trafficking crime, and that th
• United States v. Yehuda Draiman
  784 F.2d 248· 7th Cir.· 1986-02-21 ·cited 82×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the mail fraud convictions, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings.
• United States v. Earnest Jackson, Jr.
  588 F.2d 1046· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-02 ·cited 82×
  The court held that non-electronic eavesdropping from an adjacent motel room does not violate the Fourth Amendment, but reversed the possession conviction due to insufficient evidence.
• United States v. Lyles
  593 F.2d 182· 2d Cir.· 1979-01-31 ·cited 82×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error by modifying its jury instructions after summations, denying severance motions, or admitting certain evidence, as no substantial prejudice was demonstrated.
• United States v. Testa
  548 F.2d 847· 9th Cir.· 1977-02-22 ·cited 82×
  The court held that evidence of prior acts and co-conspirator statements were admissible, that the conspiracy continued despite an arrest, and that one-party consent recordings were valid. The denial of a change of venue was not an abuse of discretion.
• Knight v. Miami-Dade Cnty.
  856 F.3d 795· 11th Cir.· 2017-05-05 ·cited 81×
  Officers Ryan Robinson and Michael Mendez of the Miami-Dade Police Department shot and killed Frisco Blackwood and Michael Knight and wounded Latasha Cure during a traffic stop on November 12, 2007. Knight's estate and Cure sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive force and unde
• United States v. Landis Cuber Dothard
  666 F.2d 498· 11th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 81×
  The court held that the trial court improperly admitted extrinsic act evidence because it was not sufficiently similar to the charged offense and its probative value was outweighed by its prejudicial impact. The court also found insufficient evidence that the defendant committed
• United States v. Hoyle Lamont Peacock
  654 F.2d 339· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-27 ·cited 81×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to convict Vera Peacock of one arson, and Harvey and Hoyle Peacock of the murder of Ruth Elaine Peacock. The court also reversed the forfeiture order.
• United States v. Gonzalez-Sanchez
  825 F.2d 572· 1st Cir.· 1987-07-31 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in finding a defendant breached his plea agreement, that evidence of prior crimes was largely admissible under Rule 404(b), but that evidence admitted against one defendant violated collateral estoppel and required reversal.
• United States v. Adcock
  558 F.2d 397· 8th Cir.· 1977-06-14 ·cited 80×
  The dissenting judge believes certain testimony was improperly admitted due to lack of probative value and unfair prejudice, while other testimony was admissible.
• United States v. Nixon
  918 F.2d 895· 11th Cir.· 1990-12-07 ·cited 78×
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences for most defendants, but vacated and remanded for resentencing for some, finding no error in wiretap evidence, transcript use, or most evidentiary rulings, but remanding for resentencing consistent with guidelines.
• United States v. Sophie
  900 F.2d 1064· 7th Cir.· 1990-04-24 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying Poliak's motion for an evidentiary hearing on his alleged plea agreement, nor in denying Laskowski's motion to suppress statements made after his arrest, nor in admitting evidence of Laskowski's prior marijuana dealing
• United States v. Swiatek
  819 F.2d 721· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-13 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying an evidentiary hearing on outrageous government conduct, nor in admitting certain evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), and that prosecutorial remarks, while sometimes improper, did not deprive the defendant
• United States v. Richardson
  764 F.2d 1514· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-12 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the government's use of a confidential informant did not constitute overreaching, evidence of prior bad acts was admissible, taped conversations were properly admitted, the evidence was sufficient to support convictions, and a variance between the indictment a
• United States v. Fortes
  619 F.2d 108· 1st Cir.· 1980-04-01 ·cited 78×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the district court did not err in denying the suppression motion, admitting certain statements under evidence rules, or limiting cross-examination.
• United States v. Serafin Alfonso
  759 F.2d 728· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-01 ·cited 77×
  The court held that the search of the vessel was a valid extended border search, and the admission of prior acts evidence against Alfonso was an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Reed
  639 F.2d 896· 2d Cir.· 1981-01-27 ·cited 77×
  The court held that Reed's abduction did not violate due process, his trial in absentia was proper, the mail fraud counts were not multiplicitous, and evidence of similar transactions was admissible.
• United States v. Aleman
  592 F.2d 881· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-06 ·cited 76×
  The court affirmed the convictions of both defendants, finding sufficient evidence for conspiracy and possession, and that the admission of extrinsic evidence and prosecutorial comments did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Rollins
  862 F.2d 1282· 7th Cir.· 1988-11-21 ·cited 75×
  The court affirmed both defendants' convictions but remanded Slaughter's case for reconsideration of his sentence.
• United States v. Vito Spillone
  879 F.2d 514· 9th Cir.· 1989-06-15 ·cited 74×
  The court should have dismissed the indictment due to the cumulative effect of government misconduct, including the knowing use of a perjurious and unreliable witness before the grand jury.
• United States v. Wynn
  845 F.2d 1439· 7th Cir.· 1988-05-02 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the admission of evidence regarding a prior unsuccessful investigation and reports of missing food stamps did not constitute plain error, as the defendant failed to raise a Rule 404(b) objection at trial and the admission did not cause a miscarriage of justice
• United States v. Zambrana
  841 F.2d 1320· 7th Cir.· 1988-03-07 ·cited 74×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance and that the wiretap affidavits sufficiently demonstrated the necessity of electronic surveillance.
• United States v. Drake Williams
  809 F.2d 1072· 5th Cir.· 1987-01-29 ·cited 74×
  The court affirmed most convictions but reversed some for specific defendants, finding that plea agreements did not preclude further indictment and that informal use immunity granted to Grossman was binding.
• United States v. Silverman
  745 F.2d 1386· 11th Cir.· 1984-11-05 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently alleged a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1503, the evidence was sufficient for conviction, the jury instructions were proper, the subpoena for disciplinary complaints was valid, and the exclusion of certain evidence was not an abuse of di
• United States v. Rice
  550 F.2d 1364· 5th Cir.· 1977-04-20 ·cited 74×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on pre-indictment delay, severance, cross-examination limitations, admissibility of evidence under Rule 404(b) and 613(b), witness interviews, or jury requests for transcripts.
• United States v. Mills
  704 F.2d 1553· 11th Cir.· 1983-05-20 ·cited 73×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence related to the Aryan Brotherhood, denying hybrid representation, or in its jury instructions. The court also found no violation of speedy trial rights or improper admission of character evidence.
• United States v. Kern
  657 F.2d 985· 8th Cir.· 1981-08-12 ·cited 73×
  The court affirmed the convictions of Burchinal, Kern, and Gerard for conspiracy and Travel Act violations, but remanded for reduction of costs assessed against Kern.
• United States v. Bennett
  848 F.2d 1134· 11th Cir.· 1988-07-07 ·cited 72×
  The court held that the admission of William Bennett's prior drug smuggling convictions was proper under Rule 404(b) and Rule 403, and that the use of a single interpreter for multiple Spanish-speaking defendants did not violate their statutory or constitutional rights. The court
• United States v. Fabio Alonso
  740 F.2d 862· 11th Cir.· 1984-08-30 ·cited 72×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress electronic surveillance evidence, admitting evidence of personal cocaine use, instructing the jury on the definition of an enterprise, or in limiting closing arguments. It also held that a RICO c
• United States v. Conley
  523 F.2d 650· 8th Cir.· 1975-08-15 ·cited 72×
  The court should grant the petition for rehearing en banc to establish guidelines on the admissibility of evidence of the accused's criminal conduct not charged in the indictment.
• Hank R. McWHORTER v. City OF Birmingham
  906 F.2d 674· 11th Cir.· 1990-07-24 ·cited 71×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial due to improper closing arguments, denying the recusal motion, or excluding witness testimony.
• United States v. Tutino
  883 F.2d 1125· 2d Cir.· 1989-06-29 ·cited 71×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Larca, the denial of severance motions was not an abuse of discretion, the use of an anonymous jury was justified and properly managed, expert testimony was admissible, redacted statements were admissible under Bruton, an
• United States v. Corbin
  734 F.2d 643· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-18 ·cited 71×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that their procedural objections lacked merit.
• United States v. Pirovolos
  844 F.2d 415· 7th Cir.· 1988-04-06 ·cited 70×
  The court held that while admitting evidence of prior convictions was an error, it was harmless given the overwhelming evidence. Cross-examination on other gun incidents at the restaurant was permissible.
• United States v. Wellington
  754 F.2d 1457· 9th Cir.· 1985-03-04 ·cited 70×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the district court did not err in its rulings on the indictment amendment, jury instructions, evidence admissibility, severance, sufficiency of evidence, Speedy Trial Act claims, juror questionnaire use, or other miscellaneous assi