Motion For Severance

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

• United States v. Johnson
  456 F.2d 295· 5th Cir.· 1972-03-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in overruling the motion to suppress evidence based on illegal search and seizure and illegal arrest, nor in denying the motion for severance.
• United States v. Brill
  350 F.2d 171· 2d Cir.· 1965-08-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's convictions for conspiracy to embezzle union funds and that no reversible error occurred during the trial.
• United States v. Kramer
  236 F.2d 656· 7th Cir.· 1956-09-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendants' entrapment defense was not supported by evidence and that the denial of a severance motion was not an abuse of discretion.
• Jetavious Young v. State
  988 So. 2d 1128· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-07-25 ·cited 9×
  Jetavious Young appeals the revocation of his probation and resulting life sentence for home-invasion robbery, as well as his convictions for robbery charges in a separate case. The court affirms all judgments but identifies a potential sentencing error in the probation revocatio
• Monson v. State
  627 So. 2d 1301· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-12-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying the motion for judgment of acquittal on the firearm possession charge due to insufficient evidence and in denying the motion to sever the firearm possession charge from the cocaine possession charge.
• United States v. Mauro Restrepo
  930 F.2d 705· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-10 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence for conspiracy and possession, denying a reduction for acceptance of responsibility, and rejecting claims of severance denial and outrageous government conduct.
• United States v. Chorman
  910 F.2d 102· 4th Cir.· 1990-07-31 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy and substantive offenses, but vacated the imposition of fines and remanded for the district court to make requisite factual findings.
• United States v. Steven L. Kaplan, M.D.
  895 F.2d 618· 9th Cir.· 1990-02-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the charges were properly joined, and the searches and jury instructions were not erroneous.
• Westlake v. The Honorable Charles E. Miner
  460 So. 2d 430· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-11-15 ·cited 8×
  Petitioner Westlake sought a writ of prohibition to prevent trial proceedings after the speedy trial time limits expired under Florida Rule 3.191. The court granted the writ and held that the state's convenience in trying codefendants together is not an exceptional circumstance j
• Rowe v. State
  404 So. 2d 1176· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-10-23 ·cited 8×
  Douglas McArthur Rowe was convicted of first-degree murder and appealed, arguing the trial court erred by denying his motion for severance from his co-defendant. The appellate court agreed and reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by forcing Rowe to stand t
• United States v. Alley
  661 F.2d 718· 8th Cir.· 1981-10-20 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court did not err in denying severance, mistrial motions, or a new trial based on insufficient evidence or newly discovered evidence.
• United States v. Green
  561 F.2d 423· 2d Cir.· 1977-08-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the admission of evidence, including a handgun and a holdup note, was not an abuse of discretion and that the defendant waived any claim regarding improper joinder by failing to move for severance.
• Cravero v. State
  349 So. 2d 649· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-07-26 ·cited 8×
  Three defendants were convicted of conspiracy to commit murder and first degree murder in the shooting death of Stanley Harris. On appeal, they challenged the trial court's denial of a motion to vacate based on newly discovered evidence, denial of motions for severance, and admis
• United States v. Marzell Peterson
  522 F.2d 661· D.C. Cir.· 1975-07-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury could permissibly infer knowledge of stolen property from unexplained possession and that evidence seized during a hot pursuit was admissible.
• United States v. Wyler
  487 F.2d 170· 2d Cir.· 1973-11-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying the defendant's motion for severance and in failing to subpoena material witnesses, violating his due process and Sixth Amendment rights.
• United States v. Russo
  413 F.2d 432· 2d Cir.· 1969-07-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for transporting stolen goods and conspiracy, and that various trial errors claimed by the appellant were not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. Stanley
  411 F.2d 514· 7th Cir.· 1969-05-09 ·cited 8×
  The admission of evidence of a prior criminal offense is not reversible error in a bench trial if there is sufficient competent evidence to support the findings, as the judge is presumed to have disregarded the inadmissible evidence.
• Willy Frank Clark v. State
  145 So. 2d 748· Fla. 2d DCA· 1962-10-05 ·cited 7×
  Willy Frank Clark was convicted of robbery along with two co-defendants. On appeal, Clark challenged the admission of a co-defendant's confession and argued the evidence was insufficient, consisting only of circumstantial evidence that did not exclude every hypothesis but guilt.
• United States v. Garrett
  961 F.2d 743· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-09 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in denying Garrett's motion for mistrial or severance, nor in denying Williams's untimely motions to suppress.
• United States v. Tonnie J. Tolliver and Ray D. Love
  937 F.2d 1183· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Tolliver's mid-trial request for appointed counsel and Love's motion for severance, and that sufficient evidence supported their convictions.
• United States v. Shirlene Wood
  879 F.2d 927· D.C. Cir.· 1989-07-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the search of Lee's home was lawful, and while Wood's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel fails because the evidence was properly seized, her conspiracy conviction is vacated due to the difficulty of the issue and the concurrency of sentences. The court
• United States v. Bueno-Risquet
  799 F.2d 804· 2d Cir.· 1986-08-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the admission of testimony and request forms regarding missing heroin exhibits was proper, and that an erroneous jury instruction on anticipated profits was harmless error. The court affirmed the convictions.
• United States v. Ward
  793 F.2d 551· 3d Cir.· 1986-06-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government's conduct in orchestrating a drug smuggling operation did not rise to the level of outrageousness required to violate due process, and that the admission of evidence of prior drug activity was proper.
• United States v. Al Davis
  747 F.2d 440· 8th Cir.· 1984-10-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for severance or his motion for a new trial based on an ambiguous verdict.
• Jones v. State
  450 So. 2d 325· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-05-23 ·cited 6×
  Jones appeals the denial of his Rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief based on ineffective assistance of trial counsel for failing to move to sever counts. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that Jones waived the claim by failing to raise it in his first
• Jervis v. Hall
  622 F.2d 19· 1st Cir.· 1980-06-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the petitioner's constitutional rights were not violated by the denial of his motion to sever, the allowance of the Commonwealth's motion to amend the indictment, or the challenged evidentiary rulings.
• Thomas v. Estelle
  486 F.2d 224· 5th Cir.· 1973-10-25 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the denial of federal habeas relief to the state prisoner applicant.
• United States v. Brooks
  477 F.2d 453· 5th Cir.· 1973-04-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting hearsay evidence regarding reputation when entrapment is asserted and that the government is not required to disclose informant identities in such cases.
• United States v. Demetre
  461 F.2d 971· 6th Cir.· 1972-06-16 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict and no abuse of discretion in the trial court's rulings.
• Alvarez v. State
  261 So. 2d 200· Fla. 3d DCA· 1972-04-25 ·cited 6×
• Neal v. United States
  342 F.2d 730· 9th Cir.· 1965-03-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions for severance, change of venue, or mistrial, and that a witness's brief mention of the defendant's past criminal history did not prejudice the jury given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• Castillo v. State
  170 So. 3d 112· Fla. 4th DCA· 2015-07-01 ·cited 4×
  Victor Castillo appeals his RICO and conspiracy convictions as a member of the criminal street gang SUR 13. He challenges whether his predicate acts were sufficiently interrelated to the gang enterprise, whether a juvenile adjudication could serve as a predicate act, and whether
• United States v. Kelly
  973 F.2d 1145· 5th Cir.· 1992-10-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for continuance, refusing to produce certain evidence, or admitting hearsay statements of a co-conspirator, and that the Bank Bribery Act was not unconstitutionally vague as applied.
• United States v. Samuels
  970 F.2d 1312· 4th Cir.· 1992-06-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying the career offender provision but that the defendant qualified as an armed career criminal, requiring remand for resentencing under the latter provision.
• United States v. Urrutia
  897 F.2d 430· 9th Cir.· 1990-02-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the 'larceny' provision of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) applies to the appellants' conduct and that the jury instructions were proper. However, the special assessment fees imposed were reversed.
• Smith v. Jago
  888 F.2d 399· 6th Cir.· 1989-10-20 ·cited 4×
  The Sixth Circuit held that the district court erred by failing to defer to state court findings of fact and by applying an improper standard of prejudice. The court found the state court's factual determinations were supported by the record and that the defendant failed to demon
• FOX v. State
  543 So. 2d 340· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-05-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying the motion for mistrial after defense counsel revealed the appellant's criminal past during voir dire, but this error was harmless. The court also held that the sentencing error, due to the lack of written reasons for departure
• United States v. Burnie Rogers and Johnny Albert Callahan
  719 F.2d 767· 5th Cir.· 1983-10-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the convictions for conspiracy and possession of marihuana with intent to distribute, and that the denial of the severance motion and suppression motion were proper.
• United States v. Davis
  597 F.2d 648· 8th Cir.· 1979-05-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury's verdict was supported by sufficient evidence, and the denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion.
• Bennie Eddie Demps v. State
  272 So. 2d 803· Fla.· 1973-01-17 ·cited 4×
  Two appellants convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death had their sentences reduced to life imprisonment following the Supreme Court's Furman v. Georgia decision invalidating then-existing death penalty statutes. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the
• United States v. Ford
  451 F.2d 1163· 5th Cir.· 1971-12-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for a new trial based on the informer's recantation, nor in denying motions for severance or failing to rule entrapment as a matter of law.
• United States v. Staples
  445 F.2d 863· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient, motions to suppress and for severance were properly denied, closing arguments were fair responses, and the presence of law books in the jury room caused no prejudice.
• Johnson v. State
  14 So. 3d 1282· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-07-10 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the postconviction court erred in summarily denying claims regarding severance of offenses and failure to seek a toxicology expert, requiring further consideration.
• Mamerto Izquierdo v. State
  890 So. 2d 1263· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-01-21 ·cited 3×
  Mamerto Izquierdo appeals his convictions for aggravated assault and misdemeanor battery following a jury trial. The appellate court reverses the misdemeanor battery conviction due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as the misdemeanor did not arise from the same circumstance
• Lanton v. State
  133 Fla. 527· Fla.· 1938-07-20 ·cited 3×
  F. C. Lanton and O. H. Allen were convicted of manslaughter (reduced from a murder indictment) in the killing of Horace Meeks. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction despite procedural defects, finding the evidence of guilt overwhelming and any trial court errors harml
• State of Del. v. Land
  24 P. 2· Del. Super. Ct.· 2018-10-01 ·cited 2×
  The Delaware Superior Court denied Maurice Land's motion for postconviction relief, finding that his trial counsel was not ineffective. The court determined that counsel's decision not to file a motion to sever the trial, not to move for a mistrial, and not to appeal the tamperin
• Heinly v. State
  201 So. 3d 769· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-09-28 ·cited 2×
  Matthew Heinly was convicted of first-degree premeditated murder in a joint trial with separate juries alongside co-defendant Wilson. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court abused its discretion by denying Heinly's request to sever
• Simmons v. State
  66 So. 3d 327· Fla. 1st DCA· 2011-06-21 ·cited 2×
  Keith Simmons appealed the trial court's summary denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion alleging ten grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel. The appellate court affirmed denial of claims two through ten but reversed the summary denial of ground one, which alleged in
• Cooper v. State
  15 So. 3d 792· Fla. 5th DCA· 2009-07-17 ·cited 2×
  Court affirmed firearm conviction but reversed cannabis conviction, holding that trial court abused its discretion by failing to sever counts where evidence of prior felony conviction was essential to firearm charge but unduly prejudicial to cannabis charge.
• Noman Ul HAQ v. State
  997 So. 2d 1284· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-01-14 ·cited 2×
  Noman Ul Haq appeals the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 motion claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirms in part and reverses in part, finding that claims regarding failure to call a witness and misadvice regarding testifying are le