Federal Rule Of Evidence 803(6) (Business Records Exception)

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

• United States v. McPARTLIN
  595 F.2d 1321· 7th Cir.· 1979-03-26 ·cited 172×
  The court held that the admission of certain testimony and grand jury statements was proper, and that the evidence against defendant Bull was sufficient to sustain his conviction.
• United States v. Beecroft
  608 F.2d 753· 9th Cir.· 1979-11-19 ·cited 113×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for mail fraud and conspiracy to commit mail fraud, and that the admission of a Dun and Bradstreet report and the sentence imposed on one defendant were proper.
• United States v. Ordonez
  737 F.2d 793· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-23 ·cited 105×
  The court held that the Ninth Circuit's refusal to adopt the rule of per se admissibility for statements falling within firmly rooted hearsay exceptions is incorrect and conflicts with Supreme Court precedent.
• United States v. Norton
  867 F.2d 1354· 11th Cir.· 1989-03-16 ·cited 96×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that various evidentiary and prosecutorial rulings were not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. Ramsey
  785 F.2d 184· 7th Cir.· 1986-02-28 ·cited 94×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's findings of guilt and that the jury instructions and evidentiary rulings were proper.
• Burgess v. Premier Corp.
  727 F.2d 826· 9th Cir.· 1984-03-05 ·cited 91×
  The court held that summary judgment and directed verdicts were properly denied on statute of limitations and release issues, but should have been granted for defendants Schrock and Darby on federal and state securities claims due to insufficient evidence of scienter or control.
• United States v. Chang An-Lo
  851 F.2d 547· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-27 ·cited 68×
  The court affirmed convictions for most defendants, but remanded for compliance with Fed.R.Crim.P. 32(c)(3)(D) for two defendants. The court found sufficiency of evidence for convictions and upheld the denial of severance motions.
• United States v. Hitsman
  604 F.2d 443· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-15 ·cited 68×
  The court affirmed all convictions, finding sufficient evidence and no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on evidence, jury instructions, or motions.
• Liner v. J. B. Talley & Co., Inc.
  618 F.2d 327· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-02 ·cited 67×
  The court affirmed the jury's verdict of no negligence and the award of maintenance and cure, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings.
• Fortier v. Dona Anna Plaza P'rs
  747 F.2d 1324· 10th Cir.· 1984-12-17 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the automatic stay provision of the Bankruptcy Act does not extend to solvent co-defendants of the debtor, and that evidentiary rulings were either waived, cured, or did not affect substantial rights.
• Itel Cap. Corp. v. Cups Coal Co.
  707 F.2d 1253· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-23 ·cited 58×
  The court affirmed the jury verdict and trial court's decisions, finding sufficient evidence for ratification and estoppel, proper application of Rule 15(c) for relation back of amendments, and admissible evidence under rules of authentication and hearsay.
• United States v. Hancho C. KIM
  595 F.2d 755· D.C. Cir.· 1979-03-12 ·cited 55×
  The court held that a telex from a foreign bank, offered to prove the defendant's financial resources, was inadmissible hearsay because it failed to meet the requirements of the business records exception and the residual exception. The court also held that the prosecutor's comme
• United States v. Baker
  855 F.2d 1353· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-02 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction, that evidentiary rulings were not an abuse of discretion, and that prosecutorial misconduct did not deny defendants a fair trial.
• United States v. Linn
  880 F.2d 209· 9th Cir.· 1989-07-18 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the appellant's automobile was lawful because there was probable cause to seize the vehicle for forfeiture, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for unlawful use of a communication facility.
• United States v. Porter
  821 F.2d 968· 4th Cir.· 1987-06-22 ·cited 50×
  The dissenting judge would reverse all convictions and grant new trials due to cumulative errors in admitting evidence and improperly joining defendants.
• Cook v. Hoppin
  783 F.2d 684· 7th Cir.· 1986-02-07 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the erroneous admission of certain hospital record statements was prejudicial and warranted a new trial, and that the district court erred in giving a 'mere accident' jury instruction.
• United States v. Veytia-Bravo
  603 F.2d 1187· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-05 ·cited 50×
  The court held that firearms dealer records, required by ATF regulations and kept in the regular course of business, are admissible under the business records exception to the hearsay rule. Prosecutorial comments about a defendant's father's arrest, if relevant and not objected t
• United States v. Orozco
  590 F.2d 789· 9th Cir.· 1979-02-01 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the search and seizure of evidence from the vehicle did not violate the Fourth Amendment, and the admission of TECS cards was proper.
• United States v. Reese
  561 F.2d 894· D.C. Cir.· 1977-06-06 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to find constructive possession with intent to distribute, and that the trial court did not err in excluding a witness's testimony based on his Fifth Amendment privilege or in denying a motion for a new trial.
• United States v. Meyers
  847 F.2d 1408· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-02 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for conspiracy to distribute cocaine and that the 1986 Act's enhanced penalty provisions were effective immediately upon enactment, thus the defendant was correctly sentenced.
• Does 1 Through 976 v. Chiquita Brands Int'l, Inc.
  47 F.4th 1278· 11th Cir.· 2022-09-06 ·cited 40×
  In this complex multi-district litigation, the Eleventh Circuit addressed whether plaintiffs alleging that Chiquita Brands International and certain executives financially supported a Colombian paramilitary group responsible for murders presented sufficient evidence to survive su
• 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
• T. Harris Young & Assocs., Inc. v. Marquette Elecs., Inc.
  931 F.2d 816· 11th Cir.· 1991-05-20 ·cited 39×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish a tying arrangement or a relevant market for antitrust claims, and that the evidence for the tortious interference claim was inadmissible hearsay.
• United States v. Kail
  804 F.2d 441· 8th Cir.· 1986-10-29 ·cited 39×
  The court held that the search warrant was valid, the evidence seized was admissible, and there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction for mail fraud.
• United States v. Duncan
  919 F.2d 981· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-14 ·cited 37×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no error in the district court's rulings on venue, evidence, jury instructions, sufficiency of evidence, or sentencing.
• United States v. DOE
  960 F.2d 221· 1st Cir.· 1992-03-30 ·cited 34×
  A conviction for being a felon unlawfully in possession of a firearm is not a "violent felony" for the purposes of the mandatory minimum sentence enhancement statute, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e).
• United States v. Henneberry
  719 F.2d 941· 8th Cir.· 1983-10-27 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for conspiracy and possession of stolen goods, and that various trial errors claimed by the defendants were not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. Gomez
  921 F.2d 378· 1st Cir.· 1990-12-20 ·cited 32×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict Benavente of conspiracy and that the district court did not err in denying a new trial based on newly discovered evidence. The court also held that while the admission of toll records was erroneous, the error was harmle
• United States v. Bortnovsky
  879 F.2d 30· 2d Cir.· 1989-06-27 ·cited 32×
  The court affirmed convictions for RICO and mail fraud, but remanded for correction of sentences, finding that the mailing of a letter concerning an insurance claim was reasonably foreseeable and thus satisfied the causation element of the mail fraud statute.
• Rychen Paddack v. Dave Christensen, Inc.
  745 F.2d 1254· 9th Cir.· 1984-10-24 ·cited 32×
  The court held that audit reports were admissible under Rule 703 as a basis for expert testimony and that the district court erred in remanding for reconsideration of an alternative holding already decided.
• United States v. Lowell F. Johnson
  594 F.2d 1253· 9th Cir.· 1979-04-04 ·cited 30×
  The court held that under Federal Rule of Evidence 1006, the proponent of a summary must establish that the underlying materials are admissible in evidence.
• United States v. Pfeiffer
  539 F.2d 668· 8th Cir.· 1976-08-16 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the admission of certain testimony and delivery receipts as business records was proper, and that the limitation on cross-examination did not prejudice the defendant.
• United States v. Sherron Basey
  613 F.2d 198· 9th Cir.· 1979-12-17 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions, and the admission of the voice identification, chemist's report, and driver's license was not erroneous.
• United States v. Johnson
  971 F.2d 562· 10th Cir.· 1992-07-28 ·cited 27×
  The court held that transfers of funds from investors to the defendant's account did not constitute transactions in 'criminally derived property' under 18 U.S.C. § 1957 because the defendant had not yet 'obtained' the proceeds. However, transfers from the defendant's account to i
• United States v. Franco
  874 F.2d 1136· 7th Cir.· 1989-04-21 ·cited 27×
  The court held that a law enforcement agent can be a qualified witness to authenticate business records under Rule 803(6) if they understand the record-keeping system, and that supplemental jury instructions were proper.
• United States v. Lino Catabran
  836 F.2d 453· 9th Cir.· 1988-01-06 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting computer printouts as business records, allowing testimony about carpet removal, or denying motions for severance and mistrial, and that the defendant was not denied effective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. RAY
  930 F.2d 1368· 9th Cir.· 1990-11-23 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a downward departure from the Sentencing Guidelines is impermissible without a mitigating circumstance, even if the case is deemed 'highly unusual'.
• United States v. Bonallo
  858 F.2d 1427· 9th Cir.· 1988-10-07 ·cited 26×
  A scheme to defraud a bank under 18 U.S.C. § 1344 does not require the misrepresentation to precede the transfer of money or property; the indictment was sufficient, and the evidence supported conviction on 11 of 12 counts.
• United States v. Huber
  772 F.2d 585· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-27 ·cited 26×
  The admission of an out-of-court statement by a coconspirator violated the Confrontation Clause and was not harmless error, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Hansen
  583 F.2d 325· 7th Cir.· 1978-08-15 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying severance motions or restricting cross-examination, and that most convictions were supported by sufficient evidence. However, the court reversed and remanded the perjury convictions for Steven R. Hansen due to prejudicial
• United States v. Page
  544 F.2d 982· 8th Cir.· 1976-11-23 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to dismiss the indictment for pre-indictment delay or lack of speedy trial, nor in admitting the lease agreement into evidence.
• United States v. Parker
  749 F.2d 628· 11th Cir.· 1984-12-26 ·cited 25×
  The court held that a conviction under 18 U.S.C.A. § 659 does not require proof that the goods were stolen from a specifically enumerated place if it is proven they were stolen from an interstate or foreign shipment.
• Petrocelli v. Davis T. Gallison, M.D.
  679 F.2d 286· 1st Cir.· 1982-06-03 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding statements from a hospital record under the business records exception (Fed.R.Evid. 803(6)) because the source of the information was unclear and it was uncertain whether the statements constituted p
• United States v. Patrick
  959 F.2d 991· D.C. Cir.· 1992-03-17 ·cited 24×
  The television receipt was not hearsay when offered to show the defendant's connection to the apartment and television, not for the truth of payment.
• United States v. Elliott
  849 F.2d 554· 11th Cir.· 1988-07-14 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant's arguments regarding speedy trial, governmental misconduct, evidentiary rulings, and procedural issues lacked merit.
• United States v. Atchley
  699 F.2d 1055· 11th Cir.· 1983-03-07 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting telephone toll records, a summary chart, coconspirator testimony, and that there was sufficient evidence to support the guilty verdict.
• United States v. LAI
  944 F.2d 1434· 9th Cir.· 1991-05-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in admitting drug records without proper foundation and remanded for an evidentiary hearing. It also instructed the district court to vacate Lai's conspiracy conviction if his continuing criminal enterprise conviction stands.
• United States v. Chestang
  849 F.2d 528· 11th Cir.· 1988-07-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that coconspirator statements were properly admitted, the government's discovery violation was harmless, the admission of check endorsements was harmless error, and the district court's prejudicial remark was cured by a corrective instruction.
• Howard F. and Mildred E. Keogh v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  713 F.2d 496· 9th Cir.· 1983-08-17 ·cited 22×
  The tax court did not abuse its discretion in admitting a casino dealer's personal diary as a business record exception to hearsay, nor did it err in determining income tax deficiencies based on a statistical analysis of that diary.
• United States v. Ricardo "Ricky" Vela
  673 F.2d 86· 5th Cir.· 1982-04-02 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the prosecution's notice-of-alibi filing was not an abuse of Rule 12.1, and telephone records were properly admitted under the business records exception.