Motion For Severance

308 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Bullock v. United States
  265 F.2d 683· 6th Cir.· 1959-02-27 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the appellants were properly convicted of criminal contempt for violating a court order mandating school desegregation, and that various procedural and evidentiary challenges raised on appeal lacked merit.
• Fletcher Fuller and Abner Fuller v. State
  159 Fla. 200· Fla.· 1947-06-24 ·cited 58×
  Fletcher Fuller and Abner Fuller were convicted of transmitting and selling lottery tickets for the illegal game of "Cuba" in Marion County, Florida. The Supreme Court affirmed their convictions, rejecting challenges to the sufficiency of the indictment, the legality of the searc
• United States v. Loya
  807 F.2d 1483· 9th Cir.· 1987-01-13 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on lesser included offenses, that sufficient evidence supported the convictions, and that the procedures for jury instructions, while unusual, did not result in prejudicial error.
• United States v. Evelio Mota and Juan Flores
  598 F.2d 995· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-16 ·cited 57×
  The court held that a defendant's amnesia does not per se render them incompetent to stand trial, and that severance is not required when defenses are merely antagonistic rather than irreconcilable.
• United States v. Martinez
  922 F.2d 914· 1st Cir.· 1991-01-09 ·cited 56×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that the government's refusal to disclose the informant's identity was proper as the informant was a mere tipster and not vital to the defense, and that severance was not required as prejudice was not sufficiently shown.
• United States v. Rivera
  825 F.2d 152· 7th Cir.· 1987-07-20 ·cited 55×
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences, holding that warrantless entry into a hotel room was justified by exigent circumstances, seizure of suitcases was permissible under plain view, and the automobile exception allowed warrantless search of a vehicle.
• Lugo v. State
  2 So. 3d 1· Fla.· 2008-10-08 ·cited 54×
  Daniel Lugo, convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and numerous other crimes, challenged the denial of his Rule 3.851 postconviction relief motion. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of relief, finding no ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to presen
• United States v. Perez
  648 F.2d 219· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-15 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conspiracy convictions and that the submission of written jury instructions was not prejudicial error. The court vacated Perez's special parole term as it cannot be imposed for violations of 21 U.S.C. § 846.
• United States v. Pruitt
  763 F.2d 1256· 11th Cir.· 1985-06-21 ·cited 53×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no merit in the appellants' claims regarding jury instructions, severance, sufficiency of evidence, or sentencing.
• United States v. Jordan
  399 F.2d 610· 2d Cir.· 1968-07-30 ·cited 53×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that evidence of another crime was admissible to show consciousness of guilt, search warrants were validly obtained, consents to search were voluntary, and discovery rules were not violated.
• United States v. Grimm
  568 F.2d 1136· 5th Cir.· 1978-03-02 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding evidence, that there was sufficient evidence to sustain Grimm's conviction, and that the denial of Grimm's motion for severance was proper.
• United States v. Thomas
  453 F.2d 141· 9th Cir.· 1971-12-20 ·cited 52×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to convict Thomas of transporting marihuana and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Lucas's motion for severance.
• United States v. White
  794 F.2d 367· 8th Cir.· 1986-06-26 ·cited 50×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the district court's rulings on severance, evidentiary matters, jury instructions, or prosecutorial remarks.
• United States v. Evans
  542 F.2d 805· 10th Cir.· 1976-10-04 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying pretrial motions, jury selection challenges, or in its handling of alleged trial errors, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdicts.
• Davenport v. United States
  260 F.2d 591· 9th Cir.· 1958-10-22 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion, and the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for conspiracy.
• Mose Daniels v. State
  57 Fla. 1· Fla.· 1909-01-01 ·cited 50×
  Three defendants were convicted of first-degree murder, with Mose Daniels sentenced to death and the other two to life imprisonment. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Daniels' conviction but reversed and remanded for new trials as to Luther Russ and Silas Daniels, finding insuff
• United States v. Taglia
  922 F.2d 413· 7th Cir.· 1991-01-11 ·cited 48×
  The court held that newly discovered evidence that is merely impeaching is not automatically barred from consideration for a new trial, but in this case, the impeachment evidence would not have changed the outcome. The court also held that the failure to renew a motion for severa
• United States v. Burl Allen Peveto, Jr.
  881 F.2d 844· 10th Cir.· 1989-07-26 ·cited 48×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, affirming its prior holding that statements intended to promote conspiratorial objectives or identify coconspirators are made in furtherance of the conspiracy.
• United States v. Oglesby
  764 F.2d 1273· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-24 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the severance motion, properly refused to suppress the confession, and correctly denied the motion for judgment of acquittal, affirming the conviction and sentence.
• United States v. Drew
  894 F.2d 965· 8th Cir.· 1990-01-17 ·cited 47×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that co-conspirator statements were admissible, the evidence was sufficient to support convictions, and the trial court did not err in admitting evidence or instructing the jury.
• United States v. Dawn
  897 F.2d 1444· 8th Cir.· 1990-03-08 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying defendants' motions regarding discriminatory jury selection, extra-judicial influence, newly discovered evidence, sentencing guidelines, or other trial-related issues.
• United States v. Armstrong
  654 F.2d 1328· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-17 ·cited 46×
  A properly balanced Allen charge, given before deliberations or allowed in the jury room, is not inherently coercive.
• United States v. Richardson
  588 F.2d 1235· 9th Cir.· 1978-10-26 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions for smuggling and conspiracy to smuggle Laetrile were supported by sufficient evidence and that their defenses of governmental misconduct and necessity were not properly before the court or applicable. The court also affirmed the co
• United States v. Eaton
  485 F.2d 102· 10th Cir.· 1973-10-02 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Anderson and Eaton of armed bank robbery but insufficient to convict Fletcher of being an accessory after the fact.
• United States v. Kahn
  366 F.2d 259· 2d Cir.· 1966-07-18 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conspiracy convictions and that the trial court did not err in denying severance motions or in its jury instructions and evidentiary rulings.
• United States v. Hack
  782 F.2d 862· 10th Cir.· 1986-01-23 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the defendants' confessions were voluntary, the decision to shackle them was justified, Hack's sentence was not cruel and unusual, and Owens' motion for severance was properly denied.
• United States v. Fogelman
  586 F.2d 337· 5th Cir.· 1978-10-11 ·cited 45×
  The court held that constant surveillance of vehicles transporting known contraband from a border crossing maintained the border search exception to the warrant requirement, even when temporally and geographically removed from the border.
• United States v. Hernandez
  780 F.2d 113· D.C. Cir.· 1986-01-10 ·cited 44×
  The admission of prior bad act evidence against Lopez-Leyva, to which he was not a party, was unduly prejudicial and violated Rule 404(b) and 403, requiring a new trial for him. Hernandez's conviction is affirmed.
• Emmett Manson v. State
  88 So. 2d 272· Fla.· 1956-05-23 ·cited 44×
  Emmett Manson was convicted of robbery after a joint trial with three codefendants whose confessions and testimony implicated him. On appeal, Manson argued that denial of his pre-trial motion for severance violated due process, but the Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that
• United States v. Atterson
  926 F.2d 649· 7th Cir.· 1991-02-25 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences, finding sufficient evidence for drug quantity, conspiracy, and other charges, and upholding the district court's evidentiary and procedural rulings.
• United States v. Santano Coronel-Quintana
  752 F.2d 1284· 8th Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for continuance, severance, and suppression, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Butler
  618 F.2d 411· 6th Cir.· 1980-03-26 ·cited 40×
  The court held that sufficient evidence existed to support the conspiracy conviction and that the trial court's jury instructions on extortion under the Hobbs Act were not reversible error, even if the payments were voluntary.
• United States v. Coplen
  541 F.2d 211· 9th Cir.· 1976-08-16 ·cited 40×
  The court held that visual observation into an aircraft is not a search under the Fourth Amendment, and a warrantless search of the aircraft and seizure of contraband were justified by exigent circumstances. The denial of motions to suppress and for acquittal were also affirmed.
• United States v. Vigil
  561 F.2d 1316· 9th Cir.· 1977-09-28 ·cited 39×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by denying a motion to sever the trials, which prejudiced the defendant Baca, and that forcing the defendant to call a codefendant who then asserted his Fifth Amendment privilege compounded the error, requiring reversal of
• United States v. Houghton
  554 F.2d 1219· 1st Cir.· 1977-05-20 ·cited 39×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to hold a Rule 11 hearing for a codefendant, denying dismissal of the indictment despite a delay in informant disclosure, limiting cross-examination regarding contempt proceedings, denying a jury-waived trial, or in i
• United States v. Miller
  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
• United States v. Reeves
  730 F.2d 1189· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-30 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying motions for continuance, suppressing evidence, admitting statements, denying individual voir dire, or denying severance, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions.
• United States v. Horton
  705 F.2d 1414· 5th Cir.· 1983-05-16 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the defendants' speedy trial rights were not violated due to permissible exclusions for pretrial motion delays, and that the evidence was sufficient to support their convictions.
• United States v. Anzalone
  555 F.2d 317· 2d Cir.· 1977-05-06 ·cited 38×
  The court held that indictments based on testimony given before the same grand jury that heard immunized testimony must be dismissed for substantive offenses, but not for false declaration counts. State transactional immunity does not shield from federal prosecution, but federal
• United States v. Clark
  480 F.2d 1249· 5th Cir.· 1973-07-05 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting hearsay testimony cured by cross-examination, refusing severance, or in its jury instructions, and affirmed the convictions.
• The United States v. Bazinet
  462 F.2d 982· 8th Cir.· 1972-06-29 ·cited 38×
  The court held that Bazinet's arrest was illegal due to lack of probable cause, requiring a hearing to determine if his subsequent consent to search was the fruit of that illegal arrest. Knox's conviction was affirmed.
• Kolod v. United States
  371 F.2d 983· 10th Cir.· 1967-02-03 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the appellants' proffer of FBI surveillance evidence, their motion for severance, or their requested jury instruction.
• Elliott v. State
  77 Fla. 611· Fla.· 1919-05-12 ·cited 38×
  Robert Elliott and Eulie Russell were convicted of obtaining money under false pretenses, with Russell charged as an aider and abettor. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Elliott's conviction but reversed Russell's conviction because the indictment alleged his aiding acts occurre
• United States v. Broadwell
  870 F.2d 594· 11th Cir.· 1989-04-19 ·cited 37×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support Broadwell's kidnapping and firearm convictions, and the erroneous Pinkerton instruction was harmless error. Melton's drug possession convictions were supported by sufficient evidence, and the severance denial was not an
• United States v. Gino P. Zanin and Phyllis K. Zanin
  831 F.2d 740· 7th Cir.· 1987-09-28 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the prosecutor's comment was not prejudicial, the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions, and the denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Runge
  593 F.2d 66· 8th Cir.· 1979-02-13 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the district court applied an incorrect legal standard when denying Runge's motion for a new trial based on allegations of witness perjury.
• Rollins v. State
  148 So. 2d 274· Fla.· 1963-01-02 ·cited 36×
  William Marrett Rollins was convicted of first-degree murder in a joint trial with two co-defendants. On appeal, the Florida Supreme Court rejected Rollins' contentions that the trial court erred in denying his challenge for cause to a juror and denying his motion for severance,
• United States v. Smith
  757 F.2d 1161· 11th Cir.· 1985-04-15 ·cited 34×
  The government's manipulation of evidence to create two separate crimes from a single transaction violates the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• United States v. Orrin Scott Reed
  658 F.2d 624· 8th Cir.· 1981-09-10 ·cited 34×
  The court held that denying travel expenses to appointed counsel for indigent defendants violates the Criminal Justice Act and the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
• Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Warren P. Berry. Appeal of Warren Berry. Appeal of Guillermo Brignoni
  604 F.2d 221· 3d Cir.· 1979-08-07 ·cited 34×
  The defendants' convictions for kidnapping must be reversed because they lacked the specific intent to commit an offense proscribed by the kidnapping statute, specifically the intent to exact money at the time of the alleged seizure and confinement.