Federal Rule Of Evidence 803(6)

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

• United States v. Oates
  560 F.2d 45· 2d Cir.· 1977-06-03 ·cited 256×
  The court held that the chemist's report and worksheet were inadmissible hearsay under the Federal Rules of Evidence, requiring reversal and a new trial.
• 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. Peters
  791 F.2d 1270· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-20 ·cited 104×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of the defendants, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on search warrants, property seizure, standing, grand jury proceedings, or jury instructions.
• 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. Arlan Lamar Robinson
  700 F.2d 205· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-28 ·cited 88×
  The court affirmed convictions for misrepresentation but remanded for further proceedings on the extortion conviction due to insufficient record regarding the admissibility of extrinsic offense evidence.
• United States v. Yehuda Draiman
  784 F.2d 248· 7th Cir.· 1986-02-21 ·cited 82×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the mail fraud convictions, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings.
• Abernathy v. Superior Hardwoods, Inc.
  704 F.2d 963· 7th Cir.· 1983-04-05 ·cited 73×
  The court held that the jury's verdict was excessive because it lacked a rational connection to the evidence presented, particularly regarding lost earnings and future pain and suffering, and thus remanded for a new trial or remittitur.
• 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.
• 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. Miller
  771 F.2d 1219· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-16 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the Sherman Act is not unconstitutionally vague as applied to price-fixing, the indictment was sufficient, the grand jury composition challenge failed, and Jencks Act violations were harmless errors.
• 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. Gjon N. Nivica
  887 F.2d 1110· 1st Cir.· 1989-09-29 ·cited 57×
  The court affirmed the disposition of the motion in limine issue, agreeing that precedent foreclosed a different approach. The court also concurred in the result regarding the right to testify, finding no reversible error.
• 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. Licavoli
  604 F.2d 613· 9th Cir.· 1979-09-13 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the authorization orders for electronic surveillance were valid, and the trial court did not err in admitting evidence or denying hearings.
• United States v. Wagner
  834 F.2d 1474· 9th Cir.· 1987-12-24 ·cited 52×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no abuse of discretion in the denial of the continuance, no prejudice from pre-indictment delay, and no reversible error in the denial of the motion to substitute counsel or the jury instruction.
• Wallace Motor Sales, Inc. v. Am. Motors Sales Corp.
  780 F.2d 1049· 1st Cir.· 1985-12-19 ·cited 51×
  The court held that a conspiracy to terminate a dealership franchise, if proven, constitutes a lack of good faith under the Automobile Dealer Suits Against Manufacturers Act, and that the jury had a reasonable basis to find Wallace Motors did not act in bad faith.
• 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. Wright
  573 F.2d 681· 1st Cir.· 1978-03-28 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of other crimes, tape recordings, the prosecutor's comment on the failure to call witnesses, time variance, a car rental payment slip, and the denial of an accomplice instruction were not grounds for reversible error.
• Stone v. Morris
  546 F.2d 730· 7th Cir.· 1976-12-10 ·cited 50×
  A district court has the discretion to compel an incarcerated party's presence at trial via writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum, and a prison memorandum may be admissible under the business records exception if a proper foundation is laid.
• 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.
• Crimm v. Mo. Pac. R.R. Co.
  750 F.2d 703· 8th Cir.· 1984-12-19 ·cited 44×
  The court affirmed the judgment, holding that while one jury instruction error occurred, it was harmless, and other alleged errors did not warrant reversal.
• United States v. Croft
  750 F.2d 1354· 7th Cir.· 1984-12-14 ·cited 44×
  The court held that while the judge personally doubts the interpretation, precedent dictates affirming the conviction based on the statute's application to conversion of services.
• United States v. Sand
  541 F.2d 1370· 9th Cir.· 1976-09-13 ·cited 44×
  The court held that pre-indictment delay did not violate due process, bank records obtained via civil summonses were admissible, and challenges to taint hearings and foreign record authentication were without merit.
• 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.
• United States v. Flom
  558 F.2d 1179· 5th Cir.· 1977-09-08 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the jury was erroneously instructed on the 'flow of commerce' and that the government's departure from its bill of particulars was prejudicial, requiring reversal.
• United States v. Moran
  759 F.2d 777· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-03 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing sixteen counts based on pre-indictment delay, but affirmed the defendant's conviction on the remaining count.
• 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. Julienne Jesse MAY
  622 F.2d 1000· 9th Cir.· 1980-07-03 ·cited 38×
  The court held that defendants were properly charged by information, not indictment, and that the bar letters were sufficient to preclude reentry, and that the admission of photographs and data cards was proper.
• 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.
• Morrison Grain Co., Inc. v. Utica Mut. Ins. Co.
  632 F.2d 424· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-08 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the trial court properly allocated the burden of proof under an 'all risks' marine insurance policy, and that the findings of fact were not clearly erroneous, but remanded for reconsideration of certain damages.
• United States v. Lutz
  621 F.2d 940· 9th Cir.· 1980-05-09 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the evidence supported a finding of a single fraudulent scheme, the admission of prior bad acts evidence was proper, and any errors were harmless.
• 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. Jakobetz
  955 F.2d 786· 2d Cir.· 1992-01-09 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting DNA profiling evidence, applying the admissibility standard for novel scientific evidence under the Federal Rules of Evidence.
• 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. Reese
  568 F.2d 1246· 6th Cir.· 1977-12-30 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the admission of rebuttal testimony regarding prior bad acts was proper to show intent and knowledge, and that the jury instructions, while containing a minor error, did not constitute plain error. The admission of hospital records was also proper. Finally, th