Preponderance Of The Evidence

3,085 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 56 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Nicosia
  638 F.2d 970· 7th Cir.· 1980-11-25 ·cited 26×
  The dissenting judge argues that the court should adopt the reasoning of Demma and Hansford, overruling Johnston, and that the defendant presented sufficient evidence for an entrapment jury instruction.
• United States v. Cassity
  631 F.2d 461· 6th Cir.· 1980-10-16 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the admissibility of co-conspirator statements was properly handled and that the issue of whether beeper surveillance violated defendants' privacy expectations requires further factual determination.
• In re The Interest of A. Z. v. State
  383 So. 2d 934· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-05-07 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the adjudicatory hearing was conducted in a manner that violated due process and statutory requirements, rendering the dependency order unsustainable.
• United States v. Oliver
  523 F.2d 253· 2d Cir.· 1975-06-17 ·cited 26×
• United States v. Hughes
  389 F.2d 535· 2d Cir.· 1968-02-15 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the prosecutor's summation was inflammatory and the judge's charge contained an erroneous standard of proof, requiring reversal.
• Jacobs v. United States
  350 F.2d 571· 4th Cir.· 1965-08-26 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the motion for relief without granting the request for an independent psychiatric examination at government expense.
• Paivinen v. Sands
  339 F.2d 217· C.C.P.A.· 1964-12-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the Board of Patent Interferences erred in finding Paivinen had not proven reduction to practice and reversed that holding, remanding for further consideration of the burden of proof and support issues.
• Hatchell v. Hayes
  157 So. 2d 855· Fla. 1st DCA· 1963-11-14 ·cited 26×
  In a personal injury case arising from a rear-end motor vehicle collision, the appellate court reversed a jury verdict and remanded for a new trial on damages because the jury awarded only out-of-pocket expenses totaling the exact amount of medical bills and lost wages, but appar
• Salter v. Knowles
  97 So. 2d 138· Fla. 2d DCA· 1957-09-25 ·cited 26×
  A real estate broker sought to recover a commission for producing a buyer for property. The trial court found the broker was not the procuring cause of the sale and entered judgment for the defendants. The appellate court affirmed, applying the standard that trial court judgments
• State v. Waterman
  12 So. 3d 1265· Fla. 4th DCA· 2009-07-01 ·cited 25×
  The State appealed a trial court's downward departure sentence for escape, arguing the defendant's extensive criminal history precluded a finding that the offense was an "isolated incident" as required by Florida Statutes. The appellate court agreed and reversed, holding that the
• T.J.N. v. State
  977 So. 2d 770· Fla. 2d DCA· 2008-03-28 ·cited 25×
  T.J.N., a juvenile adjudicated of battery, appeals a restitution order requiring him to pay $1,910 for truck damage. The appellate court affirmed that T.J.N. was liable for restitution because the damage was related to his criminal episode, but reversed and remanded the specific
• Santiago v. State
  889 So. 2d 200· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-12-15 ·cited 25×
  Patrick Santiago appealed the revocation of his community control for domestic battery, leaving his approved residence without permission, and resisting arrest without violence. The court reversed the revocation on the first two counts due to insufficient non-hearsay evidence but
• A.J.V. v. State
  842 So. 2d 1027· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-04-23 ·cited 25×
  A.J.V., a juvenile adjudicated delinquent for aggravated battery, challenged the circuit court's decision to place him in a high-risk residential program contrary to the Department of Juvenile Justice's recommendation for probation. The appellate court reversed because the court'
• Winborn v. State
  625 So. 2d 977· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-10-22 ·cited 25×
  Affirming grand theft conviction but reversing restitution order because the state failed to prove victim losses by competent evidence rather than mere prosecutor assertions.
• Lachman v. Ill. State Bd. OF Educ.
  852 F.2d 290· 7th Cir.· 1988-07-18 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the proposed Individualized Education Program (IEP) provided a free appropriate public education and that parents do not have a right to compel a specific educational methodology.
• Brown v. Fauver
  819 F.2d 395· 3d Cir.· 1987-05-18 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the prisoner's claim for restoration of good-time credits is cognizable only under habeas corpus, not § 1983, and that he failed to exhaust state remedies. Furthermore, the prisoner lacks standing to seek prospective relief.
• Mfg. Research Corp. v. Graybar Elec. Co., Inc.
  679 F.2d 1355· 11th Cir.· 1982-07-09 ·cited 25×
  The court held that a prior offer for sale of a device embodying the claimed invention invalidates the patent under the on-sale bar, and that the presumption of patent validity is weakened if the Patent Office did not consider relevant prior art.
• Farmers Co-Operative Ass'n OF Talmage v. Strunk
  671 F.2d 391· 10th Cir.· 1982-02-18 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the debtor's failure to disclose his bank account balance constituted a knowing and fraudulent concealment of assets and a false oath, warranting denial of discharge.
• United States v. Wiring, Inc.
  646 F.2d 1037· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-01 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the record lacked sufficient evidence to support a finding that General Electric Supply Co. knowingly misapplied funds received from the subcontractor, thus reversing the lower court's decision to reallocate those funds.
• Acme Hwy. Prods. Corp. v. The D. S. Brown Co. & Delmont D. Brown
  431 F.2d 1074· 6th Cir.· 1970-09-24 ·cited 25×
  The patent is valid and entitled to the earlier filing date of its parent application because the continuation-in-part application did not introduce new subject matter, and the district court erred in finding joint inventorship by applying the wrong burden of proof.
• Davis Clary v. Isom
  55 Fla. 384· Fla.· 1908-01-01 ·cited 25×
  The appellate court affirmed an order granting a new trial, holding that the trial judge did not abuse their discretion. The court clarified the standard of review for orders granting new trials, emphasizing that appellate courts should not interfere unless the evidence clearly p
• Gonzalez v. State
  40 So. 3d 86· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-07-14 ·cited 24×
  Defendant Gonzalez appeals a restitution order of $31,354 entered after her no contest plea to grand theft, arguing the evidence was legally insufficient to support the value of stolen jewelry. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirms, holding that the victim's testimony regar
• C.C.B. v. State
  828 So. 2d 429· Fla. 1st DCA· 2002-10-09 ·cited 24×
  In this juvenile delinquency appeal, the First District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's commitment of a minor to high-risk residential placement for making a false bomb threat, holding that the court's primary reasons for departing from the Department of Juvenile Justice
• In the Interest of M.F.G. v. Dep't OF Child. & Families
  723 So. 2d 290· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-10-14 ·cited 24×
  A Florida appellate court upheld the termination of parental rights for D.H.G. with respect to her son and the adjudication of her daughter as dependent. The court found sufficient evidence that D.H.G.'s severe mental disorder, inability to provide stable care, and past failure t
• United States v. Boney
  977 F.2d 624· D.C. Cir.· 1992-10-13 ·cited 24×
  A felon juror's concealed status, discovered after a jury trial, requires reversal and a new trial because the juror's disqualification is not based on bias and cannot be adequately assessed post-trial.
• United States v. Trujillo
  959 F.2d 1377· 7th Cir.· 1992-03-24 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the quantity of controlled substances is not an element of the offense under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), and therefore does not need to be determined by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Schuster
  948 F.2d 313· 7th Cir.· 1991-11-04 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the preponderance of the evidence standard is sufficient for sentencing determinations, even when linked to statutory minimums, unless the departure is exceptionally large.
• United States v. Palmer
  946 F.2d 97· 9th Cir.· 1991-09-27 ·cited 24×·via Burden Of Proof By Preponderance Of The Evidence
  The court held that a sentence imposed upon revocation of probation is to be treated as part of the original sentence and computed separately from a sentence imposed for a new criminal conviction when consolidated for sentencing.
• United States v. Sanders
  942 F.2d 894· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-11 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in applying a five-level enhancement under USSG § 2S1.3(b)(1) because sufficient evidence supported the finding that the defendant knew or believed the funds involved in the structuring offense were criminally derived property.
• United States v. Rodriguez-Luna
  937 F.2d 1208· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-22 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the sentence and plea, finding the evidence sufficient to establish the relevant drug quantity for sentencing, the district court's procedural errors under Rule 32 did not warrant resentencing, and the defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was
• United States v. Santos
  932 F.2d 244· 3d Cir.· 1991-05-03 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the district court's failure to define 'preponderance of the evidence' and instruct on threats to children did not constitute plain error.
• Benoit Balthazar v. State
  549 So. 2d 661· Fla.· 1989-09-28 ·cited 24×
  The state must demonstrate the voluntariness of a Miranda waiver by a preponderance of the evidence, even when the defendant alleges a limited understanding of English.
• United States v. Harris
  882 F.2d 902· 4th Cir.· 1989-08-22 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the defendant bears the burden of proving entitlement to a downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility by a preponderance of the evidence, and that the district court's denial of the adjustment was not clearly erroneous.
• Morel v. State
  547 So. 2d 341· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-08-11 ·cited 24×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a restitution order requiring a probationer to pay $16,800 to victims, holding that the state failed to meet its burden of proving damages beyond the $1,200 the defendant admitted taking.
• Jefferson Cnty. Bd. OF Educ. v. Anne Breen
  853 F.2d 853· 11th Cir.· 1988-08-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding Bryce Hospital inappropriate and the Ranch Treatment Center appropriate for Alice Breen's educational needs, and affirmed the orders for reimbursement and compensatory education.
• Earle v. Benoit
  850 F.2d 836· 1st Cir.· 1988-06-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding evidence of town officers' statements due to lack of proven conspiracy, but erred in directing a verdict on the civil rights conspiracy claim, though this error was harmless.
• Felts v. State
  537 So. 2d 995· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-01-14 ·cited 24×
  William Felts appeals his ten-year armed robbery sentence, which exceeded the three-year guideline recommendation. The court affirms the sentence, holding that one valid reason for departure (a gun battle with police) justifies the departure even though other stated reasons were
• Roberts v. Corrothers
  812 F.2d 1173· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to review the Parole Commission's discretionary decisions, even if framed as constitutional claims, unless the Commission acted outside its statutory discretion or violated the Constitution.
• Cutco Indus., Inc. v. Naughton
  806 F.2d 361· 2d Cir.· 1986-11-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that plaintiff established a prima facie case for personal jurisdiction over the defendant under New York's long-arm statute, and the district court erred in dismissing the complaint without an evidentiary hearing.
• United States v. Anglian
  784 F.2d 765· 6th Cir.· 1986-03-05 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Victim and Witness Protection Act's use of 'restitution' was not limited by traditional restitutionary concepts but allowed for broader compensation for damages.
• United States v. Balistrieri
  778 F.2d 1226· 7th Cir.· 1985-11-20 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in its decisions regarding recusal, jury selection, admission of evidence, or sufficiency of evidence.
• Fed. Crop Ins. Corp. v. Hester
  765 F.2d 723· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a juror's inadvertent failure to disclose farming background did not warrant a new trial, and that the preponderance of the evidence standard was appropriate for the False Claims Act claim.
• DePASS v. United States
  721 F.2d 203· 7th Cir.· 1983-11-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court's finding that the plaintiff had not proven an increased risk of cardiovascular disease or loss of life expectancy by a preponderance of the evidence was not clearly erroneous.
• United States v. Krezdorn
  718 F.2d 1360· 5th Cir.· 1983-11-10 ·cited 24×
  A prima facie case of prosecutorial vindictiveness can be rebutted by showing that the prosecutor's decision to add charges was motivated by a desire to cure an evidentiary error identified on appeal, rather than to punish the defendant for exercising his appellate rights.
• Williamson v. Charles R. "Dick" Brown
  646 F.2d 196· 5th Cir.· 1981-05-28 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court's finding of a single blow to the back of the decedent's head was not clearly erroneous, and the plaintiff failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant caused the fatal injury.
• United States v. Balano
  618 F.2d 624· 10th Cir.· 1979-12-18 ·cited 24×
• United States v. Vitale
  596 F.2d 688· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit plain error by admitting testimony regarding information received by police and by failing to give a limiting instruction, nor by excluding witness testimony without an offer of proof.
• DON Burton, Inc. v. AETNA Life & Cas. Co.
  575 F.2d 702· 9th Cir.· 1978-03-23 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court erred by failing to properly instruct the jury on the insurer's arson defense, which was not harmless error.
• Modica v. United States
  518 F.2d 374· 5th Cir.· 1975-07-31 ·cited 24×
  The court held that summary judgment was proper because the appellant's prior admissions and his employees' guilty pleas created no genuine issue of material fact, despite his later affidavit denying wrongdoing.
• United States v. Johnson
  495 F.2d 378· 4th Cir.· 1974-04-05 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the search of the defendant's handbag was incident to a lawful arrest and therefore constitutionally permissible, and that the confession was voluntary under the preponderance of the evidence standard.