1,383 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
-
The court held that the trial judge's private communications with the jury, particularly the erroneous instruction on leniency, violated the defendant's right to be present and prejudiced the verdict, requiring reversal.
-
The court held that a potentially prejudicial remark by an agent was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
-
445 F.2d 1266·
9th Cir.·
1971-06-01
·cited 42×
The court held that the indictment was not fatally defective, the evidence was sufficient to support a finding that the appellants were dealers, and the trial court did not err in admitting certain statements or refusing requested instructions.
-
The court held that the trial court erred in restricting cross-examination regarding the details of a pretrial police lineup identification, and this error was not harmless.
-
355 F.2d 731·
2d Cir.·
1966-01-31
·cited 42×
-
The admission of evidence of prior independent crimes, unrelated to the tax evasion charge, was prejudicial error requiring reversal.
-
820 F.2d 1485·
9th Cir.·
1987-07-02
·cited 41×
The court should give greater deference to a district judge's determination that a defendant is knowingly and intelligently waiving counsel, and not rely solely on rote recitation of mechanical formulas.
-
487 So. 2d 1058·
Fla.·
1986-05-01
·cited 41×
The court held that notification of counsel was sufficient under rule 3.410, and the defendant's absence during the jury's communication was harmless error.
-
659 F.2d 590·
5th Cir.·
1981-10-19
·cited 41×
The court held that some defendants' claims were untimely and that the remaining claims did not constitute substantial violations of the Jury Selection and Service Act, but remanded for consideration of constitutional issues.
-
Lewis Edward Johnson, Jr., a 17-year-old transferred to adult criminal court, was convicted of sexual battery and sentenced to adult sanctions. The appellate court affirmed the conviction but vacated the sentence because the trial court failed to comply with newly amended statuto
-
The court held that the defendant was not entitled to twenty peremptory challenges because the government waived the possibility of capital punishment, and that other trial errors were harmless or not an abuse of discretion.
-
William Kopsho appeals his death sentence in a first-degree murder case after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Hurst v. Florida invalidated Florida's capital sentencing scheme. The Florida Supreme Court vacates Kopsho's death sentence and remands for a new penalty phase, find
-
Norman Moore appeals the denial of his motion for a new trial following his conviction for sexual battery on a physically helpless person. The court reversed, holding that the trial court applied an incorrect legal standard by testing sufficiency of the evidence rather than the w
-
605 So. 2d 974·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1992-10-06
·cited 40×
Allen Clewis was convicted of cocaine sales based primarily on an undercover officer's eyewitness identification. The appellate court reversed because the prosecutor committed fundamental error by misstating the reasonable doubt standard, telling the jury they must choose which s
-
838 F.2d 1530·
11th Cir.·
1988-03-10
·cited 40×
The court held that the trial court erred by admitting the defendant's statement without first determining if he had knowingly and intelligently waived his Miranda rights, but this error was harmless.
-
817 F.2d 1127·
5th Cir.·
1987-05-13
·cited 40×
The court held that the district court did not err in amending the jury verdict ex parte, admitting the tax expert's testimony, admitting the hearsay document as a prior consistent statement, or denying the motion to suppress based on Dotson's reasonable expectation of privacy, t
-
The court agrees that out-of-court statements made by co-conspirators after arrest should be admissible, questioning the continued vitality of the Krulewitch rule.
-
438 So. 2d 31·
Fla. 5th DCA·
1983-08-18
·cited 40×
This case addresses the proper scope of impeaching an adverse party called as a witness under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.450(a) and whether a single wrongful arrest can support separate recoveries for both false imprisonment and malicious prosecution. The court reversed an
-
676 F.2d 352·
9th Cir.·
1982-05-03
·cited 40×
The court should affirm the lower court's decision because no prejudice was demonstrated from the alleged procedural defect.
-
649 F.2d 1345·
9th Cir.·
1981-07-06
·cited 40×
The court held that the admission of coconspirator statements was proper, the evidence was sufficient to convict, and the trial court did not err in its rulings on jury instructions, evidence admission, or cross-examination.
-
The court held that the jury's consideration of extrinsic evidence requires application of the 'harmless beyond a reasonable doubt' standard, not a lesser standard, for constitutional error.
-
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.
-
The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's finding of ineffective assistance of counsel, distinguishing the case from precedent where counsel's specific trial actions were at issue.
-
593 F.2d 626·
5th Cir.·
1979-04-20
·cited 40×
The court held that a single, isolated reference to a defendant's post-arrest silence, which was not emphasized by the prosecution and was arguably ambiguous, constituted harmless error given the strength of the evidence and the defendant's own testimony implying cooperation.
-
584 F.2d 1137·
2d Cir.·
1978-08-03
·cited 40×
The court held that the defendants' convictions for conspiracy, harboring illegal aliens, and using interstate facilities to operate an illegal enterprise were supported by sufficient evidence and that their procedural challenges lacked merit.
-
The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the conspiracy conviction and that various evidentiary and procedural rulings by the trial court were not grounds for reversal.
-
The mailing of vouchers to credit card companies by merchants who knew the credit card users were using stolen cards is sufficiently related to the fraudulent scheme to violate the mail fraud statute.
-
513 F.2d 1210·
2d Cir.·
1975-04-04
·cited 40×
The court held that while the evidence might not have been sufficient to prove Kurshenoff's participation in the single conspiracy charged, there was no prejudice to his substantial rights requiring reversal.
-
492 F.2d 962·
7th Cir.·
1974-02-26
·cited 40×
The court held that the jury's verdicts were not inconsistent, the denial of the motion to suppress was proper, and the government's conduct did not violate due process, affirming the convictions.
-
483 F.2d 477·
3d Cir.·
1973-07-16
·cited 40×
The court held that while the prosecutor's closing arguments contained improprieties, they did not constitute reversible error due to the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
-
The court held that while a jury instruction on the burden of proof for intoxication was erroneous, it did not affect substantial rights and was harmless error when considered with the entire charge and evidence.
-
The court held that the evidence obtained from the defendant's car was admissible, her arrest was lawful, and there was no unnecessary delay in her arraignment.
-
The court held that the admission of evidence was proper and that prosecutorial remarks, while intemperate, did not prejudice the defendant, thus affirming the conviction.
-
The court held that the trial judge's finding of an independent source for the in-court identification was not supported by the facts, and the identification should have been excluded.
-
An erroneous jury instruction that effectively directs a guilty verdict if the jury finds the defendant was present at the scene of the crime is reversible error, as it infringes upon the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial.
-
The court held that the indictment sufficiently stated a conspiracy charge and that the admission of certain co-conspirator statements, even if potentially hearsay, constituted harmless error given the overwhelming evidence.
-
The court held that the jury instruction on intent was erroneous and that the indictment was also deficient, requiring reversal of the conviction.
-
The court held that the appellant failed to demonstrate prejudice from the unrecorded oral arguments, and therefore, a remand for further proceedings was not warranted.
-
The court held that the admission of evidence obtained through an unlawful search and seizure, along with erroneous jury instructions and prejudicial testimony, constituted reversible error.
-
145 F.2d 58·
9th Cir.·
1944-09-21
·cited 40×
-
614 So. 2d 453·
Fla.·
1992-09-24
·cited 39×
Constitutional errors involving the improper admission of a discovery deposition as substantive evidence in violation of the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause are subject to harmless error analysis; however, when a deposition provides non-cumulative evidence not testified to b
-
The court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no abuse of the writ, no incompetence to stand trial, no denial of choice of counsel, no ineffective assistance of counsel, no improper Faretta inquiry, no constitutional issue regarding the race of t
-
A criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel and Due Process rights are violated when their attorney is disbarred and fails to inform the client or the court of this fact, and the defendant is denied presence at an in camera discussion of the matter.
-
546 F.2d 166·
5th Cir.·
1977-01-31
·cited 39×
The court held that while restricting cross-examination regarding a probation officer's sentencing recommendation was error, it was harmless error, and the conviction is affirmed.
-
508 F.2d 444·
7th Cir.·
1974-12-18
·cited 39×
The court held that the conspiracy and substantive Dyer Act counts were distinct offenses, and that the erroneous admission of other crimes evidence against Miller and Davis was harmless due to overwhelming evidence of their guilt. However, Jordan's conviction was reversed due to
-
-
The Florida Supreme Court held that a victim's testimonial statement identifying the defendant as possessing a firearm violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment confrontation rights under Crawford v. Washington, and that a discovery deposition conducted by defense counsel does not
-
The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no merit in claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, improper prosecutorial arguments, or burden of proof shifting.
-
The court held that the record was insufficient to determine if Hitchcock error was harmless, and thus, a remand for an evidentiary hearing was necessary.
-
851 F.2d 152·
6th Cir.·
1988-07-05
·cited 38×
The court held that the district court erred in admitting testimony from former employees about their terminations, as it was irrelevant and unduly prejudicial, and that the jury instruction on willfulness was improper.