Presumption Of Innocence

1,266 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Gonsalves
  675 F.2d 1050· 9th Cir.· 1982-04-28 ·cited 21×
  The court held that fleeing from justice in one federal jurisdiction tolls the statute of limitations for unrelated charges in another federal jurisdiction, and a good faith effort to surrender does not toll the statute.
• Gaito v. Brierley
  485 F.2d 86· 3d Cir.· 1973-09-21 ·cited 21×
  Compelling a defendant to appear before a jury in prison clothes unconstitutionally infringes his due process right to be presumed innocent, and the district court's finding that the clothes were not identifiable as prison clothes was clearly erroneous.
• Bostwick v. United States
  218 F.2d 790· 5th Cir.· 1955-01-20 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its procedures regarding jury instructions or the exclusion of expert testimony, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.
• United States v. Giallo
  206 F.2d 207· 2d Cir.· 1953-08-20 ·cited 21×
  The dissenting judge believes the trial judge's participation exceeded the limits of judicial discretion, constituting reversible error.
• Ex parte Hatcher
  86 Fla. 330· Fla.· 1923-10-19 ·cited 21×
  C. D. Hatcher, arrested in Leon County on a capias from Manatee County for passing a worthless check, sought habeas corpus relief to be admitted to bail in Leon County rather than being held for transport to Manatee County. The Florida Supreme Court held that a person charged wit
• Franco v. State
  777 So. 2d 1138· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-01-31 ·cited 20×
  Franco was convicted of second-degree murder and attempted robbery with a firearm. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the trial court erred in denying a challenge for cause of a juror who expressed inability to presume innocence and concerns about the defe
• United States v. PAZ
  927 F.2d 176· 4th Cir.· 1991-03-04 ·cited 20×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant of using a firearm during and in relation to drug trafficking, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to reopen the case after the verdict.
• United States v. Littlefield
  840 F.2d 143· 1st Cir.· 1988-02-24 ·cited 20×
  The court, bound by precedent, concurred with the majority decision.
• United States v. Unruh
  855 F.2d 1363· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-03 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the jury instruction on intent to injure or defraud was potentially misleading, and that the failure to instruct on the defense of board consent or good faith constituted reversible error for certain counts, requiring remand.
• State v. Milton
  488 So. 2d 878· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-05-14 ·cited 20×
  The State appeals from a trial court's dismissal of a first-degree murder indictment following a mistrial. The appellate court reverses, holding that the trial court improperly evaluated evidence and resolved factual disputes (self-defense and premeditation) that are exclusively
• Dendalee McBEE v. Grant
  763 F.2d 811· 6th Cir.· 1985-06-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the petitioner's Sandstrom claim is procedurally barred due to failure to object at trial, and the trial judge's comment did not render the trial fundamentally unfair.
• State v. Bolton
  383 So. 2d 924· Fla. 2d DCA· 1980-04-23 ·cited 20×
  The State appealed a trial judge's grant of a new trial in a second-degree murder conviction, challenging the judge's finding that the prosecutor committed reversible error by allegedly commenting on the defendant's failure to testify. The appellate court reversed, holding that t
• United States v. Hall
  588 F.2d 613· 8th Cir.· 1978-12-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its voir dire, admission of prior convictions, or in entering judgment on the verdict due to sufficient evidence.
• Esaw Jones v. State
  343 So. 2d 921· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-03-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while the taking of blood samples was an illegal search, the admission of testimony regarding those samples constituted harmless error due to overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Williams
  505 F.2d 947· 8th Cir.· 1974-10-29 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the jury instructions on reasonable doubt, when viewed as a whole, and the court's comments on the evidence did not constitute prejudicial error requiring reversal.
• Williams v. Estelle
  500 F.2d 206· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that compelling a defendant to wear prison garb at trial, despite a request for civilian clothes, violates due process and is not harmless error if the evidence of guilt is not overwhelming.
• United States v. Johnson
  455 F.2d 311· 5th Cir.· 1972-02-03 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the defendants' rights were not violated by the trial court's procedures or instructions.
• United States v. Turchick
  451 F.2d 333· 8th Cir.· 1971-10-19 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court's jury instructions, when viewed as a whole, adequately conveyed the presumption of innocence and the prosecution's burden of proof, even if not in the exact language requested by the defendants.
• United States v. Wyatt
  442 F.2d 858· D.C. Cir.· 1971-03-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial judge's extensive questioning of the defendant and his alibi witness, and an erroneous jury instruction regarding a loaded weapon, constituted reversible error requiring a new trial.
• United States v. Boone
  401 F.2d 659· 3d Cir.· 1968-09-24 ·cited 20×
• Burrup v. United States
  371 F.2d 556· 10th Cir.· 1967-01-13 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court's Allen instruction and supplemental instructions on fraud, conspiracy, and circumstantial evidence were not improper.
• Sheppard v. Maxwell
  346 F.2d 707· 6th Cir.· 1965-05-05 ·cited 20×
  The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the district court improvidently granted Dr. Sheppard's habeas corpus petition and ordered his release. The court vacated the district court's order and remanded Dr. Sheppard to custody.
• Rhay v. Browder
  342 F.2d 345· 9th Cir.· 1965-02-05 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting the writ of habeas corpus because the petitioner waived his constitutional claim by failing to comply with state procedural requisites for objecting to jury instructions.
• United States v. DI Donato
  301 F.2d 383· 2d Cir.· 1962-03-21 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendant waived his right to suppress evidence by failing to file a motion before trial, and that the trial court's jury instructions, while not perfectly explicit, were not prejudicial error.
• LEE v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  227 F.2d 181· 5th Cir.· 1955-11-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the death of a taxpayer does not preclude the use of the net worth method for reconstructing income or the assessment of fraud penalties, and that the Tax Court's factual findings are binding if not clearly erroneous.
• United States v. Cumberland
  200 F.2d 609· 3d Cir.· 1952-12-23 ·cited 20×
  The court held that cumulative errors in the jury charge, particularly regarding character evidence and the presumption of innocence, prejudiced the defendant and required a new trial.
• United States v. Henderson
  185 F.2d 189· 7th Cir.· 1950-11-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for subornation of perjury, and that any errors were harmless.
• Felton v. United States
  170 F.2d 153· D.C. Cir.· 1948-06-01 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction was not subject to reversal due to alleged ineffective assistance of counsel or prejudicial jury instructions, as the issues were either tactical decisions, not objected to, or cured by other instructions.
• Spevak v. United States
  158 F.2d 594· 4th Cir.· 1946-12-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in proceeding to trial without appointed counsel, admitting photostatic copies of invoices, failing to charge on the presumption of innocence without request, or admitting FBI corroborative evidence.
• Labarbara v. State
  150 Fla. 675· Fla.· 1942-05-29 ·cited 20×
  Tony LaBarbara was convicted of lottery-related offenses (bolita) based on evidence that he paid undercover police informants who had purchased lottery tickets from him. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction despite finding the trial court's jury instructions were imp
• McNair v. State
  61 Fla. 35· Fla.· 1911-01-01 ·cited 20×
  The court reversed a conviction for entering a building with intent to steal, finding that the evidence did not sufficiently prove the required criminal intent. The defendant's intoxication and the circumstances of his entry suggested he was seeking a place to sleep off his drunk
• State v. Clements
  668 So. 2d 980· Fla.· 1996-02-29 ·cited 19×
  The death of a criminal defendant after judgment and sentence, but during the pendency of an appeal, does not require the prosecution to be permanently abated ab initio; the appeal may be dismissed or proceed for good cause.
• United States v. Merrival
  600 F.2d 717· 8th Cir.· 1979-06-28 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for mistrial, prohibiting inquiry into the victim's sexual history, refusing a specific cautionary instruction, or delaying sentencing, and therefore affirmed the conviction.
• United States v. Leadell Walton
  538 F.2d 1348· 8th Cir.· 1976-08-05 ·cited 19×
  The court held that the admission of interlocking confessions in a joint trial was not reversible error, as the government's independent case was strong and the confessions were cumulative, rendering any error harmless. The court also found the warrantless search of an automobile
• United States v. Phillips
  527 F.2d 1021· 7th Cir.· 1975-12-30 ·cited 19×
  Statements made by the prosecuting attorney during closing argument, misstating the law and vouching for witness credibility, were prejudicial and deprived the defendant of a fair trial.
• Bertram G. Horn v. State
  298 So. 2d 194· Fla. 1st DCA· 1974-07-02 ·cited 19×
  Bertram Horn appeals his second-degree murder conviction, challenging the admission of testimony from Joyce Walker regarding an illegally intercepted telephone conversation between Horn and his murdered estranged wife Gloria. The court held that Florida's Security of Communicatio
• Bassett v. Smith
  464 F.2d 347· 5th Cir.· 1972-07-17 ·cited 19×
  The dissenting judge argues that the ruling in Smith v. Smith should be applied retroactively, disagreeing with the majority's balancing of factors.
• Broadnax v. State
  57 So. 2d 651· Fla.· 1952-03-25 ·cited 19×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for possessing lottery tickets, holding that the evidence presented by the state was legally insufficient to prove the defendant's possession or knowledge of the tickets. The court emphasized the need for proof inconsistent with any
• United States v. Rutkin
  189 F.2d 431· 3d Cir.· 1951-05-23 ·cited 19×
  The court held that money obtained through extortion, where the claim is known to be spurious, constitutes taxable income.
• Cordell v. State
  157 Fla. 295· Fla.· 1946-01-08 ·cited 19×
• State v. Will Lewis
  152 Fla. 178· Fla.· 1943-01-15 ·cited 19×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a Black defendant charged with rape may challenge the exclusion of Black people from the grand jury that indicted him, even though he failed to make the challenge before the grand jury was empaneled and sworn. The court rejected a statutory bar
• Jenkins v. State
  31 Fla. 196· Fla.· 1893-01-01 ·cited 19×
  Israel Jenkins was convicted of willfully and maliciously burning a mill in Leon County, Florida on October 14, 1892. He appealed on multiple grounds including jury composition, admission of evidence, jury instructions, and sufficiency of evidence. The Florida Supreme Court affir
• Freeman v. State
  576 So. 2d 415· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-03-19 ·cited 18×
  Earl Freeman appealed his convictions for two counts of armed robbery, challenging the trial court's denial of his mistrial motion based on a witness statement and certain jury instructions on reasonable doubt. The appellate court affirmed the convictions but modified the judgmen
• United States v. Maguire
  918 F.2d 254· 1st Cir.· 1990-11-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying suppression motions, finding sufficient probable cause for the arrests and searches, and that any Miranda violation was harmless error.
• United States v. Oshatz
  912 F.2d 534· 2d Cir.· 1990-08-23 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the majority's rule excluding guilt-assuming hypothetical questions to opinion character witnesses is overly restrictive and ignores the discretion of trial judges.
• 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. Price
  888 F.2d 1206· 7th Cir.· 1989-11-07 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the arrest was supported by probable cause and the voir dire was sufficient, affirming the conviction.
• State v. Troehler
  546 So. 2d 109· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-07-07 ·cited 18×
  Florida appealed a trial judge's decision to exclude one of three prior DUI convictions when enhancing Troehler's sentence, because the prior conviction lacked any indication of counsel representation or waiver. The Fourth District affirmed, holding that once a defendant raises t
• United States v. Halliburton
  870 F.2d 557· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-24 ·cited 18×
  A jury's brief, inadvertent observation of a defendant in handcuffs outside the courtroom does not automatically require reversal if the trial court takes appropriate curative measures and the defendant fails to affirmatively show actual prejudice.
• United States v. Robinson
  804 F.2d 280· 4th Cir.· 1986-11-03 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to voir dire prospective jurors on the presumption of innocence, admitting lay opinion testimony identifying the defendant from surveillance photos, failing to specify the nature of crimes experienced by jurors, or refus