Prejudice In Joint Trials

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

• United States v. Michel
  588 F.2d 986· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-01 ·cited 209×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for conspiracy to import marijuana and importation of marijuana, and that the stop and search of the U-Haul truck were legal.
• United States v. Baxter
  492 F.2d 150· 9th Cir.· 1973-02-16 ·cited 156×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish the existence of an over-all narcotics conspiracy and the participation of each of the eight defendants, and that the trial court did not err in denying their motions for severance.
• United States v. Cravero
  545 F.2d 406· 5th Cir.· 1976-08-06 ·cited 136×
  Entry into a third party's home to execute an arrest warrant is permissible without a search warrant if officers reasonably believe the suspect is present.
• United States v. Graham
  548 F.2d 1302· 8th Cir.· 1977-01-26 ·cited 95×
  The court held that the search warrant affidavit established probable cause, co-conspirator statements were admissible, and the joinder and severance decisions were not abuses of discretion, leading to no reversible error.
• Parker v. United States
  404 F.2d 1193· 9th Cir.· 1968-12-19 ·cited 87×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in denying a motion for a separate trial, nor was there reversible error regarding publicity, jury instructions, or in-court identifications.
• United States v. Shuford
  454 F.2d 772· 4th Cir.· 1971-12-23 ·cited 86×
  The denial of a motion to sever was not an abuse of discretion, as the trial court offered sufficient protection to prevent prejudice to the defendant seeking severance.
• United States v. Vaccaro
  816 F.2d 443· 9th Cir.· 1987-04-29 ·cited 85×
  The court held that joinder of defendants was proper, severance was not required, and evidence of other crimes was admissible under Rule 404(b). Aiding and abetting violations of the Travel Act do not require proof of knowledge of interstate facility use.
• United States v. Williams
  897 F.2d 1034· 10th Cir.· 1990-03-05 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to transfer venue, denying the motion for severance, admitting evidence seized under a warrant, applying the sentencing guidelines, or in its factual determinations regarding sentencing enhancements and base of
• United States v. Park
  531 F.2d 754· 5th Cir.· 1976-05-14 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the search warrant was valid, the consolidation of indictments was proper, the evidence was sufficient, and the denial of a hearing on electronic surveillance was appropriate.
• United States v. Boyd
  610 F.2d 521· 8th Cir.· 1979-12-06 ·cited 71×
  The court affirmed the convictions of Artez and Boyd and the denial of Clark's motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
• Lowther v. United States
  455 F.2d 657· 10th Cir.· 1972-01-24 ·cited 69×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions for acquittal, new trial, severance, or in its jury instructions, admission of evidence, or voir dire, as substantial evidence supported the convictions.
• United States v. Rubiel Marin-Cifuentes
  866 F.2d 988· 8th Cir.· 1989-01-19 ·cited 68×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding no error in the admission of evidence, sufficiency of evidence, denial of severance, or sentencing.
• United States v. Arbelaez
  719 F.2d 1453· 9th Cir.· 1983-11-10 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove a single conspiracy and that the admission of coconspirator statements and the denial of severance motions were proper.
• 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.
• Golliher v. United States
  362 F.2d 594· 8th Cir.· 1966-06-30 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the arrests, detentions, interrogations, seizure of clothing, witness viewings, joint trial, and admission of prior testimony were all lawful and did not violate the appellants' constitutional rights.
• United States v. Morris
  647 F.2d 568· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-11 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in consolidating indictments, instructing the jury on reasonable doubt, admitting evidence of cash found, charging the jury on possession of recently stolen property, or in its search warrant procedures.
• United States v. Fuel
  583 F.2d 978· 8th Cir.· 1978-08-16 ·cited 50×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support the conspiracy conviction, but sufficient evidence to support convictions on certain substantive mail fraud counts for Greene, Julia Greene, and Fuel.
• United States v. Branker
  395 F.2d 881· 2d Cir.· 1968-05-13 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the convictions of Branker, Lopez, Moore, and Ross should be affirmed, as no prejudice resulted from the joint trial.
• 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. Sullivan
  578 F.2d 121· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-10 ·cited 47×
• United States v. LEE Stoller Enters., Inc.
  652 F.2d 1313· 7th Cir.· 1981-06-30 ·cited 46×
• United States v. Glennon E. Engleman
  648 F.2d 473· 8th Cir.· 1981-05-06 ·cited 46×
  The court held that evidence of prior similar crimes is admissible to prove intent, and tape recordings made with one party's consent are admissible under the Fourth Amendment. However, a co-conspirator's statement made after the conspiracy's objective was achieved is inadmissibl
• 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. Cowley
  720 F.2d 1037· 9th Cir.· 1983-11-15 ·cited 44×
  The court held that while a conspiracy charge can justify joinder, convictions for perjury require precise questioning and a clear contrast between the alleged false statement and the truth. The court also found that testimony about a postmark was inadmissible hearsay due to lack
• United States v. Pritchett
  908 F.2d 816· 11th Cir.· 1990-08-09 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to convict David and Mark Pritchett of conspiring to evade income taxes, as the government failed to prove their knowledge of Joe Pritchett's tax liability and intent to evade taxes. The court affirmed the remaining convictions.
• United States v. Oxford
  735 F.2d 276· 7th Cir.· 1984-05-31 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed Wolf's sentence, holding that the judge did not abuse discretion by considering witness testimony and individualizing the sentence despite personal views on rehabilitation. The court also affirmed Oxford's conviction, finding no abuse of discretion in denying h
• United States v. Jones
  839 F.2d 1041· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-17 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the jury had sufficient evidence to convict the defendants of conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine and that the prosecutor's improper closing argument was harmless error. The court also affirmed the admission of recorded conversations and rejected claims
• United States v. Simmons
  679 F.2d 1042· 3d Cir.· 1982-05-14 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the statutory language 'takes and carries away, with intent to steal or purloin' in 18 U.S.C. § 2113(b) encompasses a comprehensive scheme to negotiate checks bearing forged signatures to withdraw funds from federally insured banks. The court also rejected add
• United States v. McGUIRE
  608 F.2d 1028· 5th Cir.· 1979-12-26 ·cited 28×
  The court held that McGuire's severance and hearsay objections were properly denied, and Rivera's conviction for conspiracy was supported by sufficient evidence, but his convictions for distribution and possession were not.
• United States v. Rehal
  940 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1991-07-23 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the joinder of conspiracy and substantive drug distribution charges was proper, and that sentencing enhancements for abuse of public trust and obstruction of justice were warranted.
• United States v. DeVARONA
  872 F.2d 114· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-18 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction and that the joinder of defendants and charges was proper, affirming the conviction.
• United States v. Piepgrass
  425 F.2d 194· 9th Cir.· 1970-02-16 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Hofhines' conviction for conspiracy, but sufficient to support the convictions of Piepgrass and McCandless for conspiracy and related fraud charges.
• Katz v. United States
  321 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1963-07-12 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying severance, admitting corporate records with a limiting instruction, or denying motions for acquittal, affirming the convictions.
• United States v. Bulgatz
  693 F.2d 728· 8th Cir.· 1982-11-10 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the affidavit provided sufficient probable cause for the search warrant, the trial court properly denied a motion to reopen the suppression hearing due to a lack of proof of misstatement, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance
• United States v. Seidel
  620 F.2d 1006· 4th Cir.· 1980-02-20 ·cited 24×
  Misjoinder of defendants under Rule 8(b) is not grounds for automatic reversal if the misjoinder constitutes harmless error, meaning no prejudice accrued to the defendant.
• United States v. Singer
  732 F.2d 631· 8th Cir.· 1984-04-18 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying severance, admitting hearsay statements of a co-conspirator, or in its handling of alleged prosecutorial comment on the defendants' silence, and that consent to search was voluntary.
• United States v. Caudill
  915 F.2d 294· 7th Cir.· 1990-10-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the late-disclosed tape recording or denying the severance motion.
• United States v. Wright
  564 F.2d 785· 8th Cir.· 1977-10-14 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the denial of a mistrial, the search of a home based on a mother's consent, the limitation of cross-examination regarding a witness's alleged prostitution charge, and the denial of recalling a witness for further cross-examination were not prejudicial errors.
• United States v. Zafiro
  945 F.2d 881· 7th Cir.· 1991-09-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a joint trial was permissible even with mutually antagonistic defenses, and that sufficient evidence existed to convict Zafiro of aiding and abetting a drug conspiracy.
• United States v. Houston
  892 F.2d 696· 8th Cir.· 1989-12-19 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the convictions and sentences were valid, and that the government's cross-appeal regarding sentencing under the Guidelines was procedurally barred due to a failure to object.
• United States v. Wirsing
  719 F.2d 859· 6th Cir.· 1983-10-10 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying the defendant's motion for severance of the conspiracy and tax evasion charges, as the joinder prejudiced the defendant's right to a fair trial.
• United States v. Norby Walters and Lloyd Bloom
  913 F.2d 388· 7th Cir.· 1990-09-17 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court committed reversible error by refusing to instruct the jury on the defendant Walters' advice-of-counsel defense and by denying defendant Bloom's motion for severance, which prejudiced his attorney-client privilege.
• United States v. Eufrasio
  935 F.2d 553· 3d Cir.· 1991-05-15 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the murder conspiracy predicate was properly charged against Idone as it was legally related to the gambling and extortion predicates, forming a single pattern of racketeering activity for RICO purposes. The court also affirmed the convictions of Eufrasio and
• United States v. Bruce Zalman (87-6183)
  870 F.2d 1047· 6th Cir.· 1989-02-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant waived any objection regarding the precise limits of his duty to disclose the sham nature of marriages because it was not properly raised below.
• United States v. Mahomud Rawwad
  807 F.2d 294· 1st Cir.· 1986-12-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the appellant's motion for severance, nor in admitting a co-defendant's statement, nor in allowing heroin exhibits to go to the jury room.
• 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. Johnson
  859 F.2d 1289· 7th Cir.· 1988-10-18 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the defendant waived his right to appeal the magistrate's findings by failing to object and that the identification procedures were not unduly suggestive, nor was severance required.
• United States v. Hernandez
  952 F.2d 1110· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-24 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding sufficient evidence for guilt and no abuse of discretion in denying severance or mistrial.
• United States v. Martinez
  877 F.2d 1480· 10th Cir.· 1989-06-20 ·cited 6×