Federal Rule Of Evidence 608(A)

18 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Cooper v. Asplundh Tree Expert Co.
  836 F.2d 1544· 10th Cir.· 1988-01-15 ·cited 77×
  The court held that a finding of willfulness under the ADEA in a disparate treatment case requires proof that age was the predominant factor in the employer's decision, not just a determinative factor. The court also held that back pay awards must be reduced by prior arbitral awa
• United States v. Watson
  669 F.2d 1374· 11th Cir.· 1982-03-08 ·cited 73×
  The court held that the exclusion of defense witnesses offering opinion testimony regarding the government's key witness's credibility was prejudicial error requiring reversal, as it violated the defendants' Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process and was not harmless beyond
• 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. Awkard
  597 F.2d 667· 9th Cir.· 1979-04-23 ·cited 57×
  The court held that admitting expert testimony regarding the reliability of hypnotically refreshed memory before the witness's credibility was attacked, and allowing the witness to mention hypnosis on direct examination, constituted error, but this error was not prejudicial.
• United States v. Lollar
  606 F.2d 587· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that it was not error to allow a government witness to offer an opinion on the defendant's veracity after the defendant testified, and that any error in admitting testimony about a prior police stop was harmless.
• United States v. Med. Therapy Scis., Inc.
  583 F.2d 36· 2d Cir.· 1978-08-02 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in admitting character evidence to support a witness's credibility after the defense's cross-examination attacked her veracity, and that the conspiracy and perjury convictions were supported by sufficient evidence.
• United States v. Dring
  930 F.2d 687· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-04 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court did not err in barring character evidence, allowing in-court identifications, or denying dismissal due to the deportation of alien witnesses.
• Squyres v. Hilliary
  599 F.2d 918· 10th Cir.· 1979-05-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting the plaintiff's injury testimony, the deputy sheriffs' reputation testimony, or in denying the motion for a new trial.
• United States v. Pacione
  950 F.2d 1348· 7th Cir.· 1991-12-26 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Piccinonna
  729 F. Supp. 1336· S.D. Fla.· 1990-02-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the 1985 polygraph test results were inadmissible as irrelevant under Federal Rule of Evidence 402 and alternatively inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 608, thus reinstating the original conviction.
• United States v. Hernandez
  873 F.2d 925· 6th Cir.· 1989-04-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting testimony regarding the informant's reliability and the defendant's arrest, nor did it commit plain error in allowing premature testimony about the informant's credibility.
• United States v. Williams
  822 F.2d 512· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-14 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the prosecutor's use of peremptory challenges was not discriminatory, the admission of reputation testimony was not plain error, cross-examination restrictions were not an abuse of discretion, bail denial was moot, and closing arguments were not substantially
• Gargett v. Fla. Dep't of Juv. Just.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-05-10
  The court granted in part and denied in part the defendant's motion in limine, excluding inadmissible character evidence, hearsay, and evidence of other alleged wrongs, but allowing testimony on age-related statements by Fosler.
• Wherevertv, Inc. v. Comcast Cable Commc'ns, LLC
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-03-28
  The court granted-in-part and denied-in-part various motions in limine filed by both parties, ruling on the admissibility of anticipated evidence and testimony for an upcoming trial.
• Vaughn v. 3m Co.
  N.D. Fla.· 2022-04-13
  The court held that while certain statements from the plaintiff's military disability claim might be admissible for impeachment by prior inconsistent statement, evidence of alleged forgeries is generally inadmissible due to remoteness, lack of prior investigation, and the risk of
• United States v. Padilla
  908 F. Supp. 923· S.D. Fla.· 1995-11-27
  The court held that polygraph examination results are admissible to corroborate or impeach a witness's testimony, provided certain conditions under the Federal Rules of Evidence are met, and that a single polygraph result can be sufficient under FRE 608(a).
• United States v. Lashmett
  965 F.2d 179· 7th Cir.· 1992-05-22
  The court held that the exclusion of extrinsic evidence of prior inconsistent statements and opinion testimony regarding character was harmless error, but vacated the restitution order due to plain error for failing to consider the defendant's ability to pay.
• United States v. Malady
  960 F.2d 57· 8th Cir.· 1992-03-20
  The court held that the defendant failed to demonstrate specific prejudice from the missing portion of the trial transcript, and therefore, reversal is not warranted.