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. Williams
  577 F.2d 188· 2d Cir.· 1978-06-12 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the admission of the defendant's prior conviction was proper for corroboration and to show intent, and a post-conspiracy conversation was admissible as an adoptive admission.
• United States v. Amos P. Brown, Sr.
  548 F.2d 1194· 5th Cir.· 1977-03-18 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the admission of IRS agent testimony, based on out-of-court statements from taxpayers and testifying from memory, constituted inadmissible hearsay and prejudicial "other crimes" evidence, constituting plain error.
• United States v. Hensley Garner
  837 F.2d 1404· 7th Cir.· 1987-12-29 ·cited 69×
  Joinder of defendants was proper under Rule 8(b) because a conspiracy was alleged, and severance was not required under Rule 14 as defendants failed to show sufficient prejudice from the joint trial.
• United States v. Rubiel Marin-Cifuentes
  866 F.2d 988· 8th Cir.· 1989-01-19 ·cited 68×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding no error in the admission of evidence, sufficiency of evidence, denial of severance, or sentencing.
• United States v. Houser
  804 F.2d 565· 9th Cir.· 1986-11-17 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding excusable neglect for the late filing of the notice of appeal, and that the admission of prior conviction evidence was not plain error.
• United States v. Hattaway
  740 F.2d 1419· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-31 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the joinder of defendants, admission of evidence regarding the victim's death and the defendants' lifestyle, and the prosecutor's rebuttal arguments were not grounds for reversal. The court also affirmed the sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy convictions.
• United States v. Sigfredo Rivera-Sola
  713 F.2d 866· 1st Cir.· 1983-07-27 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of attempted possession with intent to distribute, that evidence of other crimes was properly admitted to show intent, and that the magistrate's participation in jury selection and preliminary instructions d
• United States v. Sangrey
  586 F.2d 1312· 9th Cir.· 1978-11-28 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the admission of rebuttal testimony concerning a prior sexual assault was proper under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and Rule 403, even without an explicit statement of balancing by the trial judge.
• United States v. Baldarrama
  566 F.2d 560· 5th Cir.· 1978-01-20 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy and aiding and abetting, and that the admission of a prior conviction was proper for showing identity. The court also found no reversible error in other evidentiary or procedural claims.
• United States v. Kojo Sababu
  891 F.2d 1308· 7th Cir.· 1989-12-21 ·cited 67×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict on the conspiracy and Travel Act charges.
• United States v. Petty
  798 F.2d 1157· 8th Cir.· 1986-08-15 ·cited 67×
  The court held that a prior conviction under New York law, even if arising from a single indictment and resulting in concurrent sentences, can count as multiple convictions for sentence enhancement purposes if it involved multiple victims. The court also held that initiating the
• United States v. J.R. "Buddy" Carter
  760 F.2d 1568· 11th Cir.· 1985-05-28 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the defendants' arguments regarding severance, the warrantless search of the aircraft, comments on silence, admission of extrinsic evidence, and sentencing were without merit. The convictions were affirmed.
• United States v. Reme
  738 F.2d 1156· 11th Cir.· 1984-08-09 ·cited 67×
  The court affirmed the convictions for transporting and conspiring to transport illegal aliens but vacated one defendant's sentence due to the sentencing judge's reliance on unproven murder charges.
• United States v. Edwards
  696 F.2d 1277· 11th Cir.· 1983-01-31 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting a recorded conversation under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and did not commit plain error by excluding extrinsic impeachment evidence, nor did it abuse its discretion by failing to investigate jury misconduct alle
• United States v. Frederickson
  601 F.2d 1358· 8th Cir.· 1979-07-17 ·cited 67×
  The court held that statements made by the defendant could constitute a "true threat" under 18 U.S.C. § 871 if they were made with the intent to convey the impression that the threat was serious, considering the surrounding circumstances and distinguishing them from political hyp
• United States v. Mills
  597 F.2d 693· 9th Cir.· 1979-05-25 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the issue of vindictive sentencing could not be considered on appeal because the appellant relied on an affidavit not included in the record and failed to comply with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 10(c).
• United States v. Danzey
  594 F.2d 905· 2d Cir.· 1979-03-19 ·cited 67×
  The court held that evidence of similar acts was admissible to prove identity and that a witness's identification testimony, despite inconsistencies, was sufficient to support a conviction.
• United States v. Azure
  801 F.2d 336· 8th Cir.· 1986-09-17 ·cited 66×
  The court held that a pediatrician's expert opinion testimony regarding the credibility of a child sexual abuse victim invades the province of the jury and is inadmissible under Fed.R.Evid. 702.
• United States v. Benton
  637 F.2d 1052· 5th Cir.· 1981-02-23 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of prior homicides to show motive, and that the jury's verdict was not facially inconsistent. The court also found no reversible error in the other issues raised.
• United States v. Mohinder Singh
  628 F.2d 758· 2d Cir.· 1980-06-12 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding a civil suit against a defendant was permissible to show witness bias, and that curtailment of cross-examination was proper when the jury had sufficient information to assess witness credibility.
• United States v. Garcia-Rosa
  876 F.2d 209· 1st Cir.· 1989-05-23 ·cited 64×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions and affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress. However, it found that the district court abused its discretion in admitting certain extrinsic act evidence.
• United States v. Charris
  822 F.2d 1213· 1st Cir.· 1987-06-29 ·cited 64×
  The court held that consent by a foreign nation to enforce U.S. law against its vessel on the high seas does not make the vessel subject to U.S. jurisdiction under 21 U.S.C. § 955a(a), and that such consent falls exclusively under § 955a(c).
• United States v. Zeuli
  725 F.2d 813· 1st Cir.· 1984-01-19 ·cited 64×
  The court held that evidence of other bad acts was admissible to prove intent in a conspiracy case and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting such evidence or in refusing a jury instruction on a theory not supported by the facts.
• United States v. Badolato
  701 F.2d 915· 11th Cir.· 1983-04-01 ·cited 64×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence of conspiracy and rejecting claims of evidentiary and procedural errors.
• United States v. Moschiano
  695 F.2d 236· 7th Cir.· 1982-11-29 ·cited 64×
  The court held that post-indictment statements constituting new criminal acts are admissible, and subsequent similar acts can be used to prove predisposition, while severance was not warranted due to limiting instructions and a discriminating verdict.
• United States v. Weir
  575 F.2d 668· 8th Cir.· 1978-05-17 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the admission of 'other crimes' evidence, which was highly prejudicial and not substantially outweighed by its probative value, constituted reversible error.
• United States v. Towne
  870 F.2d 880· 2d Cir.· 1989-03-22 ·cited 63×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence enhancements under 18 U.S.C. § 3575, but vacated the sentence enhancements under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1) for two counts, remanding for resentencing.
• United States v. German Hernandez-Miranda
  601 F.2d 1104· 9th Cir.· 1979-08-07 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the district court did not err in giving a flight instruction, admitting evidence of bond forfeiture, admitting evidence of a prior conviction, or imposing consecutive sentences.
• United States v. Mazza
  792 F.2d 1210· 1st Cir.· 1986-06-03 ·cited 62×
  The admission of DEA agents' testimony repeating an informer's out-of-court statements was erroneous hearsay, but the error was harmless because other properly admitted evidence overwhelmingly supported the conviction.
• United States v. Foskey
  636 F.2d 517· D.C. Cir.· 1980-08-05 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of a prior arrest was prejudicial error, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. DAY
  591 F.2d 861· D.C. Cir.· 1978-12-08 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the introduction of certain other-crimes evidence and hearsay testimony was improper, requiring reversal in part.
• United States v. Beeler
  587 F.2d 340· 6th Cir.· 1978-11-30 ·cited 62×
  The court held that a fatal variance existed between the indictment and the proof presented at trial, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Skeeter Cyphers and David Willman
  553 F.2d 1064· 7th Cir.· 1977-04-21 ·cited 62×
  The court held that a mistrial declared due to a witness's inadvertent statement, despite one defendant's objection to a separate trial, did not violate double jeopardy principles because the mistrial was manifestly necessary and the defendant retained primary control over the pr
• United States v. Cardenas
  895 F.2d 1338· 11th Cir.· 1990-03-08 ·cited 61×
  The court held that testimony regarding prior drug use and distribution was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to prove intent and knowledge, and under Federal Rule of Evidence 608(b) to contradict the defendant's material testimony.
• United States v. Cardall
  885 F.2d 656· 10th Cir.· 1989-09-06 ·cited 61×
  The court held that the second prosecution did not violate double jeopardy, joinder was proper, and the admission of evidence was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. McKOY
  771 F.2d 1207· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-16 ·cited 61×
  The court held that a former prosecutor's testimony expressing his opinion on the strength of the government's case and the defendant's culpability constituted prejudicial error, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Jones
  676 F.2d 327· 8th Cir.· 1982-04-28 ·cited 61×
  The court held that the Speedy Trial Act's 30-day limit for indictment applies only when an arrest is accompanied by a filed complaint or charges, not a mere arrest followed by release without charges.
• United States v. Ira Silverman
  889 F.2d 1531· 6th Cir.· 1989-11-21 ·cited 60×
  The court held that uncharged conduct, if sufficiently reliable and part of the same course of conduct or common scheme as the offense of conviction, can be considered for sentencing purposes under the Guidelines, even if it occurred prior to the Guidelines' effective date or was
• United States v. Bailey
  859 F.2d 1265· 7th Cir.· 1988-09-22 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the mailings alleged in Counts Five, Six, and Seven were insufficient to support mail fraud convictions for Kehoe and Ticktin, and reversed those convictions. The court also reversed the mail fraud convictions of Bailey and Lang, finding insufficient evidence
• United States v. Payne
  805 F.2d 1062· D.C. Cir.· 1986-11-21 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the admission of firearms into evidence was proper to show intent to distribute a controlled substance, and the denial of a lesser included offense instruction was also correct.
• United States v. Kehm
  799 F.2d 354· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-26 ·cited 60×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the admission of a videotape was proper, the prosecution's decisions were not selective, withheld impeachment evidence was not material, a deposition was admissible due to witness unavailability, and jury instructions were adequate
• United States v. Fowler
  735 F.2d 823· 5th Cir.· 1984-06-20 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the Fowlers of conspiracy but reversed A.J. Fowler's mail fraud conviction due to the refusal to give a good faith jury instruction.
• United States v. Wormick
  709 F.2d 454· 7th Cir.· 1983-06-02 ·cited 60×
  The court held that evidence of an unrelated falsified police report was admissible to show intent and absence of mistake in a mail fraud scheme, and that mailings related to insurance applications, rental car invoices, and reimbursement checks were in furtherance of the scheme.
• United States v. Serlin
  707 F.2d 953· 7th Cir.· 1983-05-19 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the defendant's statements were voluntary and admissible, and that the admission of evidence of failure to file a 1978 return was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Boykin
  679 F.2d 1240· 8th Cir.· 1982-06-09 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of the defendant's relationships with two women, nor in admitting certain hearsay testimony, and that prosecutorial remarks and jury selection were not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. DeFILLIPO
  590 F.2d 1228· 2d Cir.· 1979-01-08 ·cited 60×
  Defendants cannot complain about joint representation after being warned and electing to proceed.
• United States v. Rucker
  586 F.2d 899· 2d Cir.· 1978-09-28 ·cited 60×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance, admitting prior conviction evidence, or in its jury instructions, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Ulysses Biggins
  551 F.2d 64· 5th Cir.· 1977-04-22 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the admission of a tape recording and evidence of other crimes was proper, despite minor foundational deficiencies, because the recording was corroborated by witness testimony and the other crimes evidence was relevant to predisposition.
• United States v. Fosher
  568 F.2d 207· 1st Cir.· 1978-01-04 ·cited 59×
  The admission of a mug shot, even with masked identifying features, was an abuse of discretion because its probative value was substantially outweighed by the potential prejudice of implying a prior criminal record.
• United States v. Rocha
  916 F.2d 219· 5th Cir.· 1990-10-22 ·cited 58×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding no reversible error in the denial of severance motions.