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. Burke
  781 F.2d 1234· 7th Cir.· 1985-12-11 ·cited 44×
  The court held that a "standing alone" jury instruction, which suggests character evidence alone may create reasonable doubt, is misleading and should not be given. Prior precedent to the contrary is overruled.
• United States v. Robinson
  774 F.2d 261· 8th Cir.· 1985-09-30 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for severance and a new trial, and that the government did not violate a plea agreement.
• United States v. Byrd
  771 F.2d 215· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-19 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the admission of a prior conviction for impeachment purposes and testimony regarding uncharged misconduct were not reversible errors, either because they were properly admitted or constituted harmless error.
• Llach v. United States
  739 F.2d 1322· 8th Cir.· 1984-07-23 ·cited 44×
  There was no prejudicial error committed on the voir dire in the present case, and the conviction should be affirmed.
• United States v. McCLURE
  734 F.2d 484· 10th Cir.· 1984-05-09 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance, discovery, or a specific jury instruction, and that the indictment was sufficient.
• United States v. Francesco
  725 F.2d 817· 1st Cir.· 1984-01-20 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the government's expert testimony, though scant, was sufficient to support the jury instruction and conviction, and that other issues raised by the defendant were without merit.
• United States v. Federico
  658 F.2d 1337· 9th Cir.· 1981-10-13 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conspiracy conviction and that the co-conspirator's statements and seized evidence were properly admitted.
• United States v. Green
  634 F.2d 222· 5th Cir.· 1981-01-12 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the affidavits supporting the search warrant did not establish probable cause to believe that fruits or instrumentalities of crimes committed in California would be found at the defendant's Florida residence.
• United States v. Avarello
  592 F.2d 1339· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-13 ·cited 44×
  The court affirmed convictions for conducting an illegal gambling business, holding that the evidence was sufficient to link defendants to a single business involving five or more persons and that various procedural and constitutional challenges lacked merit.
• United States v. Rony Mann
  590 F.2d 361· 1st Cir.· 1978-12-29 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in allowing the deposition of a key witness to be taken and admitted into evidence, and that the admission of 'other acts' evidence was irrelevant and unduly prejudicial.
• United States v. Irwin Halper
  590 F.2d 422· 2d Cir.· 1978-12-11 ·cited 44×
  The court held that consolidating the Medicaid fraud and income tax evasion indictments for a single trial was improper under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 13, as the offenses were not based on the same transaction or connected acts, nor were they of the same or similar char
• United States v. Jacobson
  578 F.2d 863· 10th Cir.· 1978-06-09 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of other drug sales for rebuttal purposes, in its jury instructions regarding co-conspirator liability, or in imposing a special parole term. The court also found that the jury instructions regarding reasonable
• United States v. Matlock
  558 F.2d 1328· 8th Cir.· 1977-07-27 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the defendant's Sixth Amendment speedy trial rights were not violated, the search of his briefcase was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, and evidence of other crimes was properly admitted.
• United States v. Riggins
  539 F.2d 682· 9th Cir.· 1976-07-26 ·cited 44×
  The admission of an uncharged money order, relevant to rebutting the defendant's defense, was not an abuse of discretion under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b).
• United States v. Pollock
  926 F.2d 1044· 11th Cir.· 1991-03-15 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the stop was lawful, consent to search was valid, and prior conviction evidence was admissible to prove intent. However, the evidence was insufficient to prove a continuous course of conduct for the Travel Act conviction.
• United States v. Alvarez-Moreno
  874 F.2d 1402· 11th Cir.· 1989-06-07 ·cited 43×
  The court held that while an indictment must provide notice of specific acts for a Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) conviction, the defendant's actual notice of the acts used to prove the continuing series element satisfied due process.
• United States v. Johnston
  784 F.2d 416· 1st Cir.· 1986-02-20 ·cited 43×
  The court affirmed jury convictions on narcotics charges, holding that evidence seized under the plain view doctrine was admissible and that the admission of co-conspirator statements and evidence of prior bad acts did not prejudice the appellants.
• United States v. William Russell Greenfield, M.D.
  554 F.2d 179· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-16 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the entrapment defense is not so inconsistent with the defense of lack of intent as to preclude their alternative assertion in this case, and that evidence of other patients was improperly admitted.
• United States v. Richard Rodney Robison (89-3724)
  904 F.2d 365· 6th Cir.· 1990-06-01 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed Smoot's conviction but vacated the sentences of both defendants, remanding for resentencing.
• United States v. Troop
  890 F.2d 1393· 7th Cir.· 1989-12-05 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy, possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and possession of a firearm during a drug offense, and that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of prior bad acts or co-conspirat
• United States v. Felix
  867 F.2d 1068· 8th Cir.· 1989-02-03 ·cited 42×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction, that the admission of prior bad acts evidence was proper, and that the exclusion of prior convictions and the denial of an entrapment instruction were not errors.
• United States v. Stovall
  825 F.2d 817· 5th Cir.· 1987-08-12 ·cited 42×
  The court held that sentences for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 657 (misapplication of funds) and 18 U.S.C. § 1006 (false entry) are not multiplicitous under the Blockburger test, as each requires proof of a fact the other does not. The court also applied the concurrent sentence doct
• United States v. Currier
  821 F.2d 52· 1st Cir.· 1987-06-22 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed the conviction but remanded for resentencing, holding that evidence of prior drug dealings and statements about using a gun for a 'hit' were admissible, but references to selling valium were not, though this latter error was harmless. The court also held that p
• United States v. Lewis
  787 F.2d 1318· 9th Cir.· 1986-04-18 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the failure to sever counts related to firearm possession from counts related to bank larceny and killing prejudiced the defendant's right to a fair trial on the killing charge, requiring reversal of that conviction.
• United States v. Guinn Dutton Hodges
  770 F.2d 1475· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-12 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the admission of evidence regarding the defendant's subsequent extortion attempt was reversible error because it was highly prejudicial and of slight probative value.
• United States v. Steel
  759 F.2d 706· 9th Cir.· 1985-04-30 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the elimination of the death penalty also eliminated the right to a prosecution witness list under 18 U.S.C. § 3432, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying other motions.
• United States v. Bari
  750 F.2d 1169· 2d Cir.· 1984-12-19 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that prosecutorial misconduct before the grand jury did not warrant dismissal of the indictment and that evidentiary rulings and severance denials were within the trial court's discretion.
• United States v. Sliker
  751 F.2d 477· 2d Cir.· 1984-12-13 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove FDIC insurance and that the admission of prior bad acts evidence was proper. Jury instructions on reasonable doubt were also found adequate.
• United States v. Primrose
  718 F.2d 1484· 10th Cir.· 1983-09-30 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the mailings of invoices and warrants were sufficiently related to the scheme to defraud to support mail fraud convictions, and that the admission of evidence of uncharged crimes and the prosecutor's remarks did not constitute reversible error.
• Austin v. Loftsgaarden
  675 F.2d 168· 8th Cir.· 1982-04-07 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed the finding of liability for securities fraud and common law fraud but remanded for reconsideration of damages, holding that evidence of tax benefits should have been considered in calculating actual damages.
• United States v. Lentz
  624 F.2d 1280· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-25 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict regarding the 'wire communication' element and that the defendants' claims of entrapment, due process violations, evidentiary errors, and indictment issues were without merit.
• United States v. Burnell G. Watson
  623 F.2d 1198· 7th Cir.· 1980-06-11 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no merit in the defendant's five alleged errors regarding sufficiency of evidence, materiality standard, Speedy Trial Act compliance, admissibility of other crimes evidence, and jury instructions.
• United States v. Powell
  587 F.2d 443· 9th Cir.· 1978-12-06 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the admission of prior convictions and a marihuana-smoking incident, along with the denial of a continuance for a material witness, constituted prejudicial error requiring reversal.
• United States v. James
  555 F.2d 992· D.C. Cir.· 1977-04-07 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the admission of evidence regarding the defendant's arrest sixteen days after the charged offense was improper and not harmless error.
• United States v. Robinson
  545 F.2d 301· 2d Cir.· 1976-11-10 ·cited 42×
  The court held that proof of non-receipt alone is insufficient to infer theft from the mails, and an erroneous jury instruction on intent can be reversible error.
• United States v. Dunnigan
  944 F.2d 178· 4th Cir.· 1991-08-30 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the enhancement for obstruction of justice based on the defendant's trial testimony was an impermissible burden on the right to testify, and thus vacated the sentence for resentencing without the enhancement.
• United States v. Adkinson
  135 F.3d 1363· 11th Cir.· 1998-02-23 ·cited 40×
  The Eleventh Circuit reversed all convictions in this complex fraud case involving a real estate development scheme. The government indicted defendants on conspiracy to commit bank fraud, mail fraud, wire fraud, and money laundering, but the conspiracy count improperly included o
• United States v. Rodriguez-Cardona
  924 F.2d 1148· 1st Cir.· 1991-01-23 ·cited 40×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding that while some evidentiary rulings and prosecutorial remarks were questionable, they constituted harmless error given the overwhelming evidence, and the sentencing departure was justified.
• United States v. Mothershed
  859 F.2d 585· 8th Cir.· 1988-10-14 ·cited 40×
  The admission of the defendant's prior conviction for possessing stolen bank money was prejudicial error because it was not relevant to any material issue other than propensity, thus requiring reversal and a new trial.
• United States v. Rubio-Estrada
  857 F.2d 845· 1st Cir.· 1988-09-15 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of the appellant's prior conviction, blank Social Security cards, and tax return, nor was the evidence insufficient for conviction.
• United States v. Nicodemo Scarfo
  850 F.2d 1015· 3d Cir.· 1988-06-29 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in empaneling an anonymous jury or admitting evidence of other crimes, and that limiting instructions were appropriate.
• United States v. Johnson
  767 F.2d 1259· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-28 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying motions for acquittal or refusing a jury instruction regarding the 'stolen character' defense, nor in admitting evidence of similar crimes or taped conversations.
• United States v. O'Connor
  737 F.2d 814· 9th Cir.· 1984-07-12 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the government's conduct was not outrageous, there was sufficient evidence of possession, and evidentiary rulings were not reversible error. The convictions are affirmed.
• United States v. Reed
  647 F.2d 678· 6th Cir.· 1981-04-29 ·cited 40×
  The court held that counts 1 and 2 should have been merged as they constituted a single offense under 18 U.S.C. § 2315, and that while the admission of prior bad acts evidence was improper, it was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Sims
  617 F.2d 1371· 9th Cir.· 1980-04-30 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict, the eyewitness identification was proper, the failure to appoint an expert witness was not error, the FBI report was correctly excluded, and the admission of evidence regarding failure to return to a halfway house was pe
• United States v. Klauber
  611 F.2d 512· 4th Cir.· 1979-11-29 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the defendant was not entitled to compel the government to grant use immunity to a defense witness, nor could the trial court impose sanctions for the government's refusal to do so, absent unfair government conduct.
• United States v. Herring
  602 F.2d 1220· 5th Cir.· 1979-09-24 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions, and the defendants received adequate representation and a fair trial.
• United States v. Grzywacz
  603 F.2d 682· 7th Cir.· 1979-08-22 ·cited 40×
  The dissenting judge believes the Madison City Police Department is not an 'enterprise' under Title IX and that the introduction of Madison County evidence was unduly prejudicial, requiring reversal.
• United States v. Derring
  592 F.2d 1003· 8th Cir.· 1979-02-14 ·cited 40×
• United States v. Moss
  544 F.2d 954· 8th Cir.· 1976-11-12 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the admission of certain hearsay statements was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evidentiary rulings or in appointing experts.