1,384 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,569 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
-
438 F.2d 373·
6th Cir.·
1971-02-17
·cited 6×
The court held that objections to jury instructions were waived, admission of certain letters was harmless error, and prejudicial closing arguments did not warrant a new trial given curative instructions.
-
438 F.2d 814·
3d Cir.·
1971-02-03
·cited 6×
The court held that the prosecutor's and trial court's comments on the defendant's failure to testify were justified due to the defense's strategic courtroom demonstration and counsel's subsequent arguments about the defendant's silence.
-
242 So. 2d 498·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1971-01-05
·cited 6×
A Florida appellate court rejected a class action petition for habeas corpus relief filed by an incarcerated individual claiming that he and others similarly situated were denied notice of their right to counsel at preliminary hearings. The court held that class actions are not a
-
435 F.2d 152·
5th Cir.·
1970-11-24
·cited 6×
The court held that the defendant's pre-arrest statements were admissible because they fell under the on-the-scene questioning exception to Miranda, and any potential error was harmless given subsequent Miranda warnings.
-
434 F.2d 161·
9th Cir.·
1970-11-24
·cited 6×
The court held that the imposition of a tax lien did not violate the appellant's Fifth Amendment rights and that any potential errors during the trial were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming evidence of guilt.
-
436 F.2d 287·
D.C. Cir.·
1970-11-03
·cited 6×
-
427 F.2d 1066·
9th Cir.·
1970-06-01
·cited 6×
The court held that the search warrant was supported by sufficient probable cause, the statutory scheme did not violate self-incrimination privileges, there was sufficient evidence to convict one appellant, consecutive sentences for manufacture and possession were proper, and pos
-
416 F.2d 234·
9th Cir.·
1969-09-17
·cited 6×
The court held that the co-defendant's attorney's opening statement comments, even if potentially prejudicial, did not violate the appellant's Sixth Amendment rights and were harmless error given the overwhelming evidence.
-
The court held that the harmless error rule can apply to Bruton errors, and the error in this case was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
The court held that the jury panel prejudice claim was harmless error, handwriting exemplars and license plate testimony were admissible, but a more severe sentence imposed after a retrial without stated reasons violates due process.
-
414 F.2d 90·
2d Cir.·
1969-07-25
·cited 6×
The court held that the prosecutor's remark was not a clear comment on the defendant's silence and, even if it were, it constituted harmless error.
-
412 F.2d 491·
9th Cir.·
1969-05-19
·cited 6×
The court held that the admission of a codefendant's confession, even if it implicated the appellant, was harmless error given the appellant's own confession and the lack of defense. The court also held that the denial of a continuance to obtain new counsel was not an abuse of di
-
The dissenting judge would reverse the judgment and grant a new trial regarding the appellants' degree of guilt.
-
The court held that subjecting the defendant to a trial with the possibility of the death penalty, after a prior conviction with a recommendation of life imprisonment, constituted harmless constitutional error.
-
The court held that even if the search and seizure of the jacket were illegal, the admission of the jacket into evidence constituted harmless error because it did not affect the substantial rights of the defendant.
-
370 F.2d 310·
9th Cir.·
1966-12-20
·cited 6×
The court held that while admitting a prior conviction for auto theft was error, it was not prejudicial enough to warrant reversal given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
-
The court held that the trial court erred in denying the defendants' timely request for witness statements under the Jencks Act, and that this error was not harmless.
-
253 F.2d 796·
8th Cir.·
1958-04-09
·cited 6×
The court held that the admission of certain exhibits was not reversible error, either because they were properly admitted or because any error was harmless.
-
249 F.2d 735·
10th Cir.·
1957-11-09
·cited 6×
The court held that even if the wife's testimony was improperly admitted, the error was harmless and did not require reversal.
-
114 Fla. 538·
Fla.·
1934-04-16
·cited 6×
In this foreclosure appeal, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's order confirming a foreclosure sale, finding that even if notice of the master's report was not given, any such error was harmless and did not constitute substantial error warranting reversal.
-
89 Fla. 309·
Fla.·
1925-03-27
·cited 6×
Orison Billings and Herman Cubbedge were convicted under the third count of an indictment charging false imprisonment, confinement, and kidnapping. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed their conviction, holding that multiple distinct acts under the same general offense statute may
-
84 Fla. 677·
Fla.·
1922-12-15
·cited 6×
Hattie White was convicted of second-degree murder. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed her conviction, holding that the evidence was amply sufficient to sustain the verdict and that any procedural errors in the trial did not warrant reversal.
-
76 Fla. 445·
Fla.·
1918-11-13
·cited 6×
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for second-degree murder, holding that the trial court's jury instructions on reasonable doubt, while not identical to the defendant's requested instruction, were sufficient and that any error in refusing the requested charge was ha
-
76 Fla. 217·
Fla.·
1918-08-09
·cited 6×
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for being a common liquor dealer, holding that any errors in jury instructions were harmless given the overall record. The court also found the evidence sufficient to sustain the conviction.
-
Three members of the Gangster Disciples—Vertuies Wall, Lawrence Grice, and Lewis Mobley—appealed their convictions for RICO conspiracy and related offenses, with Grice challenging the sufficiency of evidence and Wall and Mobley challenging various aspects of their convictions and
-
The Eleventh Circuit en banc held that unobjected-to sentencing explanation errors under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c) are reviewed for plain error, not per se reversal. The court further held that the district court did not commit plain error because the record made clear its reasons for
-
The court affirmed the sentence and restitution order, holding that the rule of specialty and extradition treaty did not bar consideration of Utsick's pre-extradition conduct for sentencing purposes.
-
The trial court's life sentences for molestation counts were properly imposed but improperly included a twenty-five-year mandatory minimum that is not authorized by statute; the sentencing error was harmless and correctable by ministerial removal of the erroneous provision from t
-
310 So. 3d 45·
Fla. 4th DCA·
2020-12-09
·cited 5×
JFA sued former employees Adam Palas, Alex Palas, and Sergio Nativi for misappropriating JFA's client list and trade secrets after they copied the company's entire server, formed a competing business (Bridge Financial), and solicited JFA's clients. A jury found the defendants lia
-
302 So. 3d 966·
Fla. 1st DCA·
2020-08-07
·cited 5×
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgments in a bad faith insurance action and a legal malpractice action. The appellant, a retired surgeon, sued his insurer (FPIC) for bad faith and his attorneys (Foley Defendants) for malpractice after a patient's death led to a l
-
When a defendant seeks resentencing after a conviction is vacated, the defendant is entitled to resentencing using a recalculated scoresheet, and the 'could have imposed' harmless error standard from Brooks v. State does not apply.
-
The trial court erred in admitting the girlfriend's unsworn statement to police regarding Helms's phone number as substantive evidence to authenticate cell phone records, because the statement was inadmissible hearsay under Florida Statute § 90.614 and § 90.801(2)(a), as it was n
-
MDVIP, a concierge medicine provider, was sued for fraud and vicarious liability arising from alleged medical malpractice by an affiliated physician, Dr. Metzger, that resulted in a patient's leg amputation. The appellate court reversed the fraud verdict and the directed verdicts
-
The court held that the trial court did not err in allowing the jury to read transcripts of recorded calls or in denying motions to suppress recorded jail calls and a gun.
-
The court held that compelling a defendant to testify at a sentencing hearing violates the Fifth Amendment, and this error was not harmless when the trial court relied on that testimony to impose a Prison Releasee Reoffender sentence.
-
David Antonio Williams was convicted of battery and resisting a law enforcement officer but appeals, arguing the trial court improperly denied his request for self-representation. The Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that once a defendant makes an unequivo
-
Amato Scott was convicted of second-degree murder, but the appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial after finding that two incriminating statements he made to police were obtained in violation of his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent. The court determined that t
-
The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed Vilseis's burglary and grand theft convictions because the trial court violated his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses by admitting a key eyewitness's discovery deposition as substantive evidence when she was unable to testify
-
114 So. 3d 1095·
Fla. 2d DCA·
2013-06-12
·cited 5×
Wife appealed a final divorce judgment, arguing it failed to include required provisions for the children's health insurance and noncovered medical expenses. The appellate court reversed in part, holding that Florida law mandates inclusion of these provisions in divorce judgments
-
The court held that the trial court erred in admitting the defendant's complete and unredacted driving record, as its probative value was substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, and this error was not harmless.
-
Jean Atis appealed his convictions for attempted carjacking and attempted robbery, arguing the State improperly cross-examined him about his prior criminal record. The court found the questioning was poorly handled but concluded any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
-
Jose Figueroa was convicted of attempted carjacking and appealed, claiming the trial court abused its discretion by limiting individual voir dire of jurors and by admitting a portion of his pre-trial statement. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding no abuse of disc
-
Christine Conner was convicted of robbery, cocaine possession, and trespass after being caught leaving a Walmart with unpaid merchandise and drugs. She appealed arguing the prosecutor impermissibly shifted the burden of proof by commenting during closing argument on her failure t
-
925 So. 2d 1040·
Fla. 3d DCA·
2003-11-26
·cited 5×
The Sidrans appealed a judgment of no liability in a product liability case against DuPont regarding Benlate DF fungicide allegedly damaging their orchid business. The court reversed and remanded, finding the trial court abused its discretion by admitting expert testimony about w
-
Clifford Earl Thomas appeals his conviction for attempted second-degree murder, arguing that the trial court improperly commented on evidence critical to the defense by suggesting there was no unrecorded conversation between Thomas and the interrogating officer. The Second Distri
-
833 So. 2d 844·
Fla. 4th DCA·
2002-12-18
·cited 5×
Target Stores appeals a jury verdict in favor of Corinne Detje for injuries sustained in a slip-and-fall incident caused by a red-painted wooden cart stopper outside the store. The appellate court affirms the judgment, finding that although plaintiff's counsel made two improper c
-
The court held that scoring errors on a defendant's scoresheet cannot be presumed harmless if they place the defendant in a different sentencing cell.
-
Billy Knowles appealed the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief regarding sentencing guideline scoresheet errors. The court reversed and remanded, holding that the trial court must either prove the scoresheet errors did not affect his sentence or re-sentence him using
-
Leonard Smith was convicted by jury of throwing a deadly missile into an occupied building after throwing a rock at a window at a youth development center. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court erred by excluding testimony that would have impeached key state