Prejudicial Impact

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

• Stewart v. United States
  275 F.2d 617· D.C. Cir.· 1960-02-16 ·cited 30×
  The court held that evidence of the defendant's mental condition after the crime is admissible if the defendant's demeanor at trial puts his mental state in issue, and that the doctrine of diminished responsibility, allowing for reduced homicide degrees based on low intelligence,
• Taenzler v. Burlington Northern
  608 F.2d 796· 8th Cir.· 1979-12-19 ·cited 28×
  The court held that expert testimony on future wage increases is admissible in FELA cases, even if it indirectly considers inflation, as long as it is not overly speculative and the jury is properly instructed on present value.
• United States v. Cavallaro
  553 F.2d 300· 2d Cir.· 1977-04-19 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove interstate kidnapping, that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague, that the trial court did not err in limiting questioning about a witness's address, and that evidence of a subsequent crime was admissible.
• United States v. Brown
  720 F.2d 1059· 9th Cir.· 1983-11-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of Sergeant McNabb's testimony, which recounted statements made by appellant Jackson during a custodial street confrontation, was prejudicial error violating Miranda and Rule 403, requiring reversal.
• United States v. Paoli
  603 F.2d 1029· 2d Cir.· 1979-06-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy charge and that the district court made no erroneous evidentiary rulings or errors in refusing jury instructions.
• United States v. Dudek
  560 F.2d 1288· 6th Cir.· 1977-08-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse discretion admitting evidence of other crimes under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b).
• Smiley v. State
  295 So. 3d 156· Fla.· 2020-05-14 ·cited 23×
  Benjamin Davis Smiley Jr. was convicted of first-degree felony murder in the April 2013 shooting death of Clifford Drake during a planned robbery and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding substantial evidence supported the mur
• Taylor v. State
  640 So. 2d 1127· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-05-25 ·cited 23×
  Walter Taylor was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder for killing Paula Smits and her young daughter Amanda in 1987. The Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial due to cumulative prosecutorial misconduct that deprived Taylor of a fa
• United States v. Orange Jell Beechum
  555 F.2d 487· 5th Cir.· 1977-07-11 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the admission of credit cards found in the defendant's possession, offered to prove intent in a mail theft case, was improper under the 'Broadway' rule requiring clear and convincing proof of prior offenses with identical physical elements.
• United States v. Davis
  787 F.2d 1501· 11th Cir.· 1986-04-28 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of a prior conviction because the defendant's misleading testimony breached a stipulation, and the conviction was used to correct a misstatement, not solely for impeachment.
• Brady v. Chem. Constr. Corp.
  740 F.2d 195· 2d Cir.· 1984-07-31 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the insurers' motion for a new trial, and that the appeal was frivolous, warranting sanctions.
• United States v. Tercero
  640 F.2d 190· 9th Cir.· 1980-01-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the loss of photographs did not warrant reversal, the defendant's speedy trial rights were not violated, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to rule in advance on the admissibility of prior convictions for impeachment.
• United States v. Henderson
  565 F.2d 900· 5th Cir.· 1978-01-06 ·cited 22×
  A prosecutor's comment on a defendant's silence at the time of arrest, before Miranda warnings, is impermissible if it lacks significant probative value and carries an intolerably prejudicial impact, even without objection.
• United States v. Stumes
  549 F.2d 831· 8th Cir.· 1977-02-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the warrantless seizure of a typewriter from a prisoner's cell was permissible due to diminished expectations of privacy and that reference to the prisoner's prior murder trial was admissible.
• United States v. Shaw
  829 F.2d 714· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-16 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the prosecutor's opening statement improperly vouched for a witness's credibility, but this error was harmless. The court also held that a mistrial was declared out of manifest necessity, thus retrial did not violate double jeopardy.
• United States v. Hickerson
  732 F.2d 611· 7th Cir.· 1984-04-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that evidence of vandalism was admissible to prove conspiracy, even if the defendant's direct involvement wasn't initially known, and that the defendant waived appellate review by failing to object at trial absent plain error.
• United States v. Skramstad
  649 F.2d 1259· 8th Cir.· 1981-06-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the affidavit supporting the search warrant was sufficient to establish probable cause, and the admission of evidence of other crimes was proper under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b).
• United States v. Watkins
  600 F.2d 201· 9th Cir.· 1979-06-13 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of theft, co-conspirator declarations, or prior failure to file tax returns, as these were relevant to proving tax evasion and the trial judge did not abuse discretion in admitting them.
• United States v. Royce Lee Bledsoe
  531 F.2d 888· 8th Cir.· 1976-02-24 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the admission of irrelevant and prejudicial evidence of prior criminal activity and bad character, along with unsubstantiated remarks in the prosecutor's closing argument, constituted prejudicial error denying the defendant a fair trial.
• United States v. Terrell
  754 F.2d 1139· 5th Cir.· 1985-02-14 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no reversible error in the net worth calculation, jury instructions, or evidentiary rulings.
• Harris v. State
  427 So. 2d 234· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-02-15 ·cited 18×
  The Florida Third District Court of Appeal reversed Harris's conviction and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial court committed reversible error by denying his motion for mistrial after a police detective testified that Harris had a 'prior felony past.' The inadmissi
• United States v. Barletta
  652 F.2d 218· 1st Cir.· 1981-06-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the tape recording due to undue prejudice outweighing its probative value.
• United States v. Dunbar
  614 F.2d 39· 5th Cir.· 1980-02-28 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions for distributing controlled substances, finding no merit in his challenges to the statute, evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, or the denial of his motion for acquittal.
• McEWEN v. The City OF Norman
  926 F.2d 1539· 10th Cir.· 1991-03-01 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to preserve most issues for appeal due to lack of contemporaneous objections at trial, and that the admitted evidence and jury instructions did not constitute plain error.
• Oather Jefferson Samples v. City OF Atlanta
  916 F.2d 1548· 11th Cir.· 1990-11-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its jury instructions or in admitting certain expert testimony and evidence regarding criminal records.
• United States v. Chaim Levy
  731 F.2d 997· 2d Cir.· 1984-01-31 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a search incident to a lawful arrest is permissible, even if the arrest warrant was not obtained despite ample opportunity. However, evidence of a prior, distinct drug transaction, even if related, must be analyzed under Federal Rules of Evidence 404(b) and 40
• United States v. Rodriguez-Pando
  841 F.2d 1014· 10th Cir.· 1988-02-26 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding a statement offered to show the defendant's state of mind, as it was not hearsay when offered for that purpose.
• State v. Richardson
  621 So. 2d 752· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-07-02 ·cited 14×
  The State of Florida appealed a trial court order denying admission of evidence regarding other crimes committed by defendant Richardson and admissions he made. The appellate court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded, holding that evidence of a prior murder could be
• United States v. Fernandez
  829 F.2d 363· 2d Cir.· 1987-09-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the admission of a cooperation agreement, even if erroneous, was harmless error, and that the trial in absentia and admission of a firearm were proper.
• Delmer Smith v. State
  170 So. 3d 745· Fla.· 2015-07-09 ·cited 12×
  Delmer Smith was convicted of first-degree murder during a home invasion and robbery, resulting in the brutal beating death of Kathleen Briles with an antique sewing machine. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed both his conviction and death sentence on direct appeal, finding suffi
• United States v. Breckenridge
  782 F.2d 1317· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-18 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that evidence seized under a facially valid search warrant was admissible under the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule, even if the warrant was later found defective.
• United States v. Chavis
  772 F.2d 100· 5th Cir.· 1985-08-27 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the mail fraud convictions, finding that any errors in evidentiary rulings or jury instructions were harmless.
• United States v. Gibbons
  602 F.2d 1044· 2d Cir.· 1979-06-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial judge abused discretion by not inquiring into prospective jurors' specific neighborhoods of residence and that admitting evidence of subsequent cocaine possession was erroneous and harmful.
• United States v. Tempesta
  587 F.2d 931· 8th Cir.· 1978-12-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for filing false tax returns was supported by sufficient evidence and that various trial and post-trial rulings, including those concerning preindictment delay, admissibility of evidence, and jury instructions, did not constitute rev
• United States v. Moody
  530 F.2d 809· 8th Cir.· 1976-03-01 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the admission of other crimes evidence was not an abuse of discretion, but the district court erred in imposing a mandatory 25-year sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 2114.
• 50 State Sec. Serv., Inc. v. Lili Carissa Giangrandi
  132 So. 3d 1128· Fla. 3d DCA· 2013-11-27 ·cited 10×
  The estate of a murder victim brought a wrongful death action against a security company that failed to maintain adequate patrols in a gated community. The court affirmed denial of the security company's motion for new trial, holding that competent substantial evidence, including
• State v. Yvetta Brown
  782 So. 2d 526· Fla. 1st DCA· 2001-04-12 ·cited 10×
  The State of Florida sought certiorari review of a trial court order excluding a prosecution witness from testifying due to a discovery violation. The appellate court held that the trial court failed to conduct a proper Richardson hearing and departed from the essential requireme
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Gordon
  712 So. 2d 1138· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-06-10 ·cited 10×
  State Farm appeals a $3.131 million judgment in favor of its insureds, Andrew Gordon and Victoria Simons, arising from an uninsured motorist claim. The appeal challenges jury selection and evidentiary rulings, particularly the exclusion of evidence regarding Gordon's substantial
• United States v. Ferreira
  821 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1987-06-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the stop and frisk of the defendant was constitutionally permissible, but the admission of evidence of firearms seized from the defendant was an abuse of discretion because the weapons were irrelevant to the unarmed bank robbery charge and unfairly prejudicial
• United States v. Johnson
  697 F.2d 735· 6th Cir.· 1983-01-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of prior act evidence was permissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to prove intent, and that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in balancing probative value against prejudice. However, the collateral estoppel issue required further
• Anderson v. State
  229 So. 3d 383· Fla. 4th DCA· 2017-10-18 ·cited 9×
  Mark Gordon Anderson was convicted of lewd or lascivious molestation of a child and sentenced to 25 years in prison plus life sex offender probation. The appellate court affirmed the conviction but reversed the sentencing order regarding an improperly imposed lump-sum cost assess
• United Auto. Ins. Co. v. The Est. OF Stephen D. Levine
  87 So. 3d 782· Fla. 3d DCA· 2011-03-30 ·cited 9×
  United Auto Insurance Company appeals a jury verdict finding it acted in bad faith in handling a personal injury protection claim following a fatal two-car collision. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment, rejecting the insurer's arguments regardi
• Darion Conner v. State
  987 So. 2d 130· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-07-11 ·cited 9×
  Darion Conner appeals his DUI manslaughter conviction, challenging the admission of a graphic photograph of the victim's body and opinion testimony from a police DUI investigator. The appellate court reverses and remands for a new trial based solely on the improper admission of t
• Jensen v. State
  555 So. 2d 414· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-12-15 ·cited 9×
  Craig Donald Jensen appealed his conviction for attempted burglary of a dwelling and criminal mischief, challenging the admission of evidence regarding eight prior burglaries of the same victim's home under the Williams rule and his classification as a habitual offender. The Flor
• United States v. Kindred
  931 F.2d 609· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury instruction was erroneous because it only required the government to prove the defendant knew he possessed a 'gun,' rather than knowing he possessed a dangerous device likely subject to regulation.
• Vance Anthony Young v. State
  562 So. 2d 370· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-05-22 ·cited 8×
  Vance Young was convicted of four counts of sexual battery and appealed, arguing the trial court improperly excluded testimony about the victim's prior sexual activities. The Florida appellate court affirmed, holding that the victim's consensual encounters with other men did not
• McDONALD v. Sandvik Process Sys., Inc.
  870 F.2d 389· 7th Cir.· 1989-03-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the danger presented by the machine's design was not open and obvious as a matter of law, and that the plaintiff's claims of incurred risk and defective condition were properly submitted to the jury.
• United States v. Valencia
  773 F.2d 1037· 9th Cir.· 1985-10-08 ·cited 8×
  The admission of testimony regarding a defendant's refusal to sign a Miranda waiver form is an error of constitutional proportions, but can be deemed harmless if the evidence of guilt is overwhelming.
• United States v. Melia
  691 F.2d 672· 4th Cir.· 1982-10-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a decision on the admissibility of other crimes evidence under F.R.Evid. 404(b) was not necessary for this appeal.
• Hans-Juergen Stoever and Karin Stoever v. Vedder Homes, Inc.
  697 So. 2d 1247· Fla. 5th DCA· 1997-07-18 ·cited 6×
  The Stoevers sought certiorari review of a trial court order denying their motion in limine to exclude evidence of their settlement with an extermination company in a construction defect lawsuit against Vedder Homes. The appellate court denied the petition, holding that the claim