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. Sostarich
  684 F.2d 606· 8th Cir.· 1982-08-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying a mistrial when the government elicited testimony suggesting the defendant had been incarcerated, as this evidence was irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial.
• United States v. Wasler
  670 F.2d 539· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that evidence of extraneous offenses was admissible to show motive and intent, and that the defendant's statements to the FBI were admissible because he was not in custody and thus not entitled to Miranda warnings.
• United States v. Williams
  657 F.2d 199· 8th Cir.· 1981-08-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the admission of prior bad acts testimony, jury instructions regarding the value of goods and dates, and the sufficiency of evidence were all proper, leading to an affirmance of the conviction.
• United States v. Tecumseh
  630 F.2d 749· 10th Cir.· 1980-08-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting the defendant's confession and a prior threat, nor in its jury instruction regarding malice, as these rulings were supported by the evidence and established legal principles.
• United States v. Gaby Habib Semaan
  594 F.2d 1215· 8th Cir.· 1979-03-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of prior misconduct, in its jury instructions, or in its handling of a jury question during deliberations.
• United States v. Ogle
  587 F.2d 938· 8th Cir.· 1978-12-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions and that the admission of a prior foreign conviction for identity purposes was not prejudicial error.
• United States v. Hauck
  586 F.2d 1296· 8th Cir.· 1978-11-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's statements during the FBI interview were admissible because he voluntarily waived his right to counsel, and evidence of a prior similar charge was properly admitted to rebut his insanity defense.
• United States v. Askew
  584 F.2d 960· 10th Cir.· 1978-10-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's constitutional rights to a speedy trial and due process were not violated, and the admission of evidence and comments on his refusal to produce handwriting exemplars were proper.
• United States v. Fey
  89 F.4th 903· 11th Cir.· 2023-12-28 ·cited 5×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that any error in admitting evidence of Fey's solicitation of a witness murder was harmless, the denial of a spoliation instruction was not plain error, and the admission of testimony about a coconspirator's death was harmless.
• Ermini v. Scott
  937 F.3d 1329· 11th Cir.· 2019-09-10 ·cited 5×
  The court held that federal law governs whether a district court may inform the jury about the legal effect of its findings, and that doing so accurately is permissible. It also held that evidence of deputies' use of force was admissible in a negligent wellness check claim, and t
• Ware v. United States
  971 F. Supp. 1442· M.D. Fla.· 1997-07-21 ·cited 5×
  The court found in favor of the Government, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove malicious continuation of prosecution.
• Sparks v. Gilley Trucking Co.
  992 F.2d 50· 4th Cir.· 1993-04-21 ·cited 5×
  The admission of prior speeding tickets was not an abuse of discretion, as they were relevant to proving intent to race.
• United States v. Landen Max Dula & Accrabond Corp.
  989 F.2d 772· 5th Cir.· 1993-04-16 ·cited 5×
  The court affirmed convictions, finding no error in the denial of a mistrial, the admission of evidence under Rule 404(b), or the sufficiency of evidence for intent to defraud, but dismissed the Brady claim due to lack of record.
• United States v. Lavell Ray Hegwood
  977 F.2d 492· 9th Cir.· 1992-10-13 ·cited 5×
  The court held that jury instructions, though initially flawed, were adequately corrected by subsequent instructions, and that evidence of prior crimes and drug use was properly admitted. The evidence was also sufficient to support the convictions.
• Morgan v. City OF Marmaduke
  958 F.2d 207· 8th Cir.· 1992-02-27 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding evidence of a prior incident involving Jetton and a motorcyclist, nor in its judgment for the City. However, the court reversed the judgment against Jetton, finding the admission of evidence regarding the Caraway inc
• Bonilla v. Yamaha Motors Corp.
  955 F.2d 150· 1st Cir.· 1992-01-31 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the trial court committed prejudicial error by admitting evidence of the plaintiff's prior and subsequent speeding tickets, as this evidence was not admissible under Federal Rules of Evidence 404(b) or 608(b) and likely influenced the jury's verdict.
• Johnson v. Hugo's Skateway
  949 F.2d 1338· 4th Cir.· 1991-11-22 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the jury's award of punitive damages, made without a guiding standard and reviewed under traditional excessiveness standards, violated due process. However, the majority's adoption of new review procedures conflicts with the Seventh Amendment.
• United States v. Schleicher
  862 F.2d 1320· 8th Cir.· 1988-12-08 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting co-conspirator testimony and evidence of other crimes, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.
• Sargent v. Armontrout
  841 F.2d 220· 8th Cir.· 1988-02-29 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the appellant was not entitled to habeas corpus relief because any potential errors were either harmless beyond a reasonable doubt or the state provided an opportunity for full and fair litigation of the claims.
• United States v. Elysee
  993 F.3d 1309· 11th Cir.· 2021-04-08 ·cited 4×
  David Elysee appealed his federal conviction for felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), challenging the trial court's evidentiary rulings and his sentence. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed his conviction, holding that the district court did not abuse its discr
• United States v. Lambert
  995 F.2d 1006· 10th Cir.· 1993-06-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of preliminary discussions about the robbery, and that a sentencing enhancement for a threat made by a co-perpetrator was appropriate because it was reasonably foreseeable.
• United States v. Elwood
  993 F.2d 1146· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-09 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the convictions of Marrero and Barnes, but remanded Elwood's case for further findings regarding the admission of prior bad acts evidence.
• United States v. Sanchez
  992 F.2d 1143· 11th Cir.· 1993-06-04 ·cited 4×
  Rafael and Luis Sanchez were acquitted of narcotics and explosives charges in Puerto Rico Superior Court for their roles in a bungled assassination attempt using a bomb that killed one of the would-be assassins. They were subsequently indicted and convicted in the Southern Distri
• United States v. Gilliam
  994 F.2d 97· 2d Cir.· 1993-06-02 ·cited 4×
  A stipulation of a prior conviction, while carrying a risk of unfair prejudice, is admissible under Rule 403 because its probative value substantially outweighs that risk.
• United States v. Bailey
  990 F.2d 119· 4th Cir.· 1993-03-22 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the admission of other crimes evidence under Rule 404(b) was proper and that the prosecution under the Hobbs Act did not violate the Tenth Amendment or lack sufficient evidence of interstate commerce interference.
• United States v. Portalla
  985 F.2d 621· 1st Cir.· 1993-02-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's factual findings supporting the revocation of supervised release were adequately supported by reliable evidence, even if some of it was hearsay not admissible in a trial.
• United States v. Kelley
  981 F.2d 1464· 5th Cir.· 1993-01-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the co-defendant's voluntary consent to search the vehicle cured any potential Fourth Amendment violation arising from the traffic stop and subsequent detention, and that evidence of flight and prior convictions were properly admitted.
• United States v. Koen
  982 F.2d 1101· 7th Cir.· 1992-12-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the arson and mail fraud convictions, and that the joinder of the embezzlement count was proper under Rule 8(a).
• United States v. Spinosa
  982 F.2d 620· 1st Cir.· 1992-12-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to suppress evidence, excluding prior bad acts evidence, admitting telephone records, or denying a missing witness instruction, affirming the conviction.
• United States v. Fragoso
  978 F.2d 896· 5th Cir.· 1992-11-23 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the trial court did not err in its Jencks Act determinations, its admission of coconspirator statements, its jury instructions, or its sentencing procedures, and that any errors were harmless.
• United States v. Powers
  978 F.2d 354· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a trial court's declaration of a mistrial due to a hung jury does not terminate jeopardy, allowing for retrial, and that the admission of evidence of prior bank robberies under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Keeper
  977 F.2d 1238· 8th Cir.· 1992-10-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the district court did not err in admitting evidence or denying a Franks hearing. Inconsistent verdicts do not require reversal.
• United States v. Sykes
  977 F.2d 1242· 8th Cir.· 1992-10-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in allowing the government's case agent to testify as an expert after sitting at the prosecution table, nor in disallowing the disclosure of a confidential informant's identity, admitting evidence of other crimes, or submitting t
• United States v. Reed
  977 F.2d 14· 1st Cir.· 1992-10-05 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant waived his objection to the admissibility of prior conviction evidence by failing to make a timely objection and that the jury reasonably found no entrapment.
• United States v. White
  972 F.2d 590· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a defendant is entitled to a lesser-included offense instruction if there is any evidence, however weak, that rationally supports acquittal on the greater offense and conviction on the lesser.
• United States v. GAY
  967 F.2d 322· 9th Cir.· 1992-06-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in replacing a juror, did not commit plain error by failing to re-voir dire the jury after a lengthy recess, and did not err in its jury instructions regarding intent to defraud, the admission of a prior civil in
• United States v. Sanders
  964 F.2d 295· 4th Cir.· 1992-04-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that admitting evidence of prior similar convictions for assault and contraband possession was an abuse of discretion under Federal Rules of Evidence 609(a) and 404(b), and this error was prejudicial to the assault conviction but harmless to the contraband possessi
• United States v. Brown
  961 F.2d 1039· 2d Cir.· 1992-04-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Uzi machine gun was seized in violation of the Fourth Amendment because the landlady's consent to search was based on a legal misapprehension, not a reasonable belief of common authority.
• United States v. Seley
  957 F.2d 717· 9th Cir.· 1992-02-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that collateral estoppel barred retrial on the conspiracy charge because the jury's acquittal on possession and importation necessarily determined the ultimate fact that the defendant lacked knowledge of the marijuana.
• United States v. Lara
  956 F.2d 994· 10th Cir.· 1992-02-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of another prosecution for impeachment purposes and correctly applied the sentencing guidelines in calculating the loss amount.
• United States v. Pacione
  950 F.2d 1348· 7th Cir.· 1991-12-26 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Armendariz-Mata
  949 F.2d 151· 5th Cir.· 1991-12-09 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the arrest, search, seizure, evidence sufficiency, and sentencing were all proper.
• United States v. Schimmel
  943 F.2d 802· 7th Cir.· 1991-09-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for mistrial, that the prosecutor's closing argument did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial, and that the jury instruction on witness credibility did not constitute plain error.
• United States v. Hines
  943 F.2d 348· 4th Cir.· 1991-07-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the officers had reasonable suspicion for an investigative stop, the subsequent seizure of evidence was lawful, the jury selection was proper, the admission of parole officer testimony was not an abuse of discretion, and the sentencing determinations under the
• United States v. Callaway
  938 F.2d 907· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's actions in purchasing a firearm and facilitating its use in a planned robbery constituted a "transfer" under 18 U.S.C. § 924(g), and that evidence of prior crimes was properly admitted for impeachment and to prove intent.
• United States v. Schnabel
  939 F.2d 197· 4th Cir.· 1991-07-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing supplemental voir dire, admitting tax returns and secretary's testimony, denying a motion for acquittal based on variance, or giving a willful blindness instruction.
• United States v. Carpenter
  933 F.2d 748· 9th Cir.· 1991-05-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Lacey Act requires a separate act of acquiring wildlife after it has been unlawfully taken, and that the Migratory Bird Treaty Act offenses were lesser-included offenses for sentencing purposes. The court affirmed false statement convictions but reversed L
• United States v. Herre
  930 F.2d 836· 11th Cir.· 1991-05-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of the defendant's prior arrest and in excluding expert testimony regarding a duress defense.
• United States v. Brookins
  919 F.2d 281· 5th Cir.· 1990-11-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in admitting evidence of prior bad acts and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• United States v. ONO
  918 F.2d 1462· 9th Cir.· 1990-11-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior conviction for intent and knowledge, but erred in calculating the base offense level by applying a potency multiplier for a controlled substance analogue.