Presumption Of Innocence

1,260 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Ginn v. State
  26 So. 3d 706· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-02-05 ·cited 9×
  Billy Dwayne Ginn was convicted of uttering forged documents and grand theft after cashing two forged American Express traveler's checks. The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reversed his convictions, holding that the State failed to present evidence proving Ginn knew the
• Kerestesy v. State
  760 So. 2d 989· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-06-14 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the trial court erred in failing to excuse two prospective jurors for cause, requiring reversal of the convictions.
• Mesidor v. Neumann
  721 So. 2d 810· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-12-16 ·cited 9×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal granted a petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking reduction of pretrial bond for a defendant charged with sexual battery and kidnapping. The court found that a $200,000 bond was effectively no bond for an indigent defendant with community ti
• Kirkland v. Fortune
  661 So. 2d 395· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-10-13 ·cited 9×
  A 17-year-old charged with first-degree felony murder challenged a bail denial order in a habeas corpus petition. The court held that the state failed to meet the constitutionally required burden of proving guilt is 'evident' or the presumption is 'great'—a standard higher than t
• United States v. Nolasco
  926 F.2d 869· 9th Cir.· 1991-02-15 ·cited 9×
  The court held that trial judges should not be required to explain the reasonable doubt standard beyond stating the phrase itself.
• S.Y. v. McMILLAN
  563 So. 2d 807· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-06-26 ·cited 9×
  The court reversed a resentencing for sexual battery, holding that convictions obtained after the initial sentencing, even if for offenses committed prior to the initial sentencing, could be used to calculate a new scoresheet for resentencing.
• Stewart v. Dugger
  847 F.2d 1486· 11th Cir.· 1988-06-09 ·cited 9×
  The dissenting judge argues that misleading statements about the jury's role in capital sentencing, made by the prosecutor and judge, violate Caldwell and require resentencing.
• United States v. Payden
  768 F.2d 487· 2d Cir.· 1985-07-17 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the district court had the inherent power under the Bail Reform Act of 1966 to detain a defendant pretrial when he attempted to arrange the murder of a government witness.
• Bontempo v. Fenton
  692 F.2d 954· 3d Cir.· 1982-11-16 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated because he did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel when he made an unsworn statement to the jury.
• Arthur v. The Honorable Carl H. Harper
  371 So. 2d 96· Fla. 4th DCA· 1978-10-06 ·cited 9×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal held that trial courts retain discretion to grant bail in life felony cases even when proof of guilt is evident and presumption is great, contrary to the literal language of Florida's constitutional bail provision. The court reasoned that the c
• Pugh v. Rainwater
  557 F.2d 1189· 5th Cir.· 1977-08-22 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the Equal Protection Clause is violated unless a judge is required to consider less financially onerous forms of pretrial release before imposing money bail on indigent defendants.
• United States v. Coggins
  433 F.2d 1357· D.C. Cir.· 1970-09-04 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the inference of guilt from possession of recently stolen property can extend to all items stolen in a single act, even if only some are found in the accused's possession, provided the single act of taking is proven.
• Atkins v. State
  210 So. 2d 9· Fla. 1st DCA· 1968-05-07 ·cited 9×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed a robbery conviction, holding that the trial court's explicit instruction to the jury mitigated any prejudice from the defendant appearing in prison garb. The court acknowledged that trying a defendant in prison attire is generally im
• State v. Doscher Curtis
  152 So. 2d 754· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-04-19 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the allegation of a prior conviction is a necessary component of an information charging a second lottery offense under Fla.Stat. § 849.09(4) for enhanced punishment.
• City OF Miami v. Jervis
  139 So. 2d 513· Fla. 3d DCA· 1962-04-03 ·cited 9×
  Three Miami police officers challenged their suspensions for alleged misconduct, asserting the Civil Service Board's disciplinary hearing violated due process. The trial court quashed the board's findings and the City Manager's judgment, finding the proceedings were pervaded by p
• Thomas v. United States
  213 F.2d 30· 9th Cir.· 1954-08-06 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the jury instruction improperly placed the burden of proving an alibi on the defendant, contrary to federal law.
• Kenion v. Gill
  D.D.C.· 1946-04-22 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the inadequacy of the jury charge, while potentially erroneous, did not rise to the level of a denial of due process sufficient to warrant habeas corpus relief.
• Hayes S. Wood v. State
  155 Fla. 256· Fla.· 1944-11-28 ·cited 9×
  Hayes S. Wood, a tax collector, was convicted of embezzling $670.65 in county funds. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction, holding that while the statute creates a prima facie case of embezzlement from failure to pay within 30 days, the evidence showed Wood paid the
• Serrano v. State
  225 So. 3d 737· Fla.· 2017-05-11 ·cited 8×
  Nelson Serrano was convicted of four first-degree murders and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and sentences on direct appeal. On postconviction review, the Court rejected Serrano's guilt-phase claims but vacated his death sentences under Hur
• McLAUGHLIN v. State
  79 So. 3d 226· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-02-15 ·cited 8×
  Timothy McLaughlin was convicted of lewd or lascivious molestation of two child victims under age twelve. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial court erred by placing a screen between the defendant and child witnesses du
• Segura v. State
  921 So. 2d 765· Fla. 3d DCA· 2006-02-22 ·cited 8×
  Andres Segura appeals his convictions for sexual battery and lewd molestation, challenging the trial court's denial of cause challenges to two prospective jurors. The appellate court found the trial court abused its discretion in failing to excuse jurors who demonstrated bias, en
• Miller v. State
  852 So. 2d 904· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-08-13 ·cited 8×
  The court notes that prior rulings require a hearing on claims of ineffective assistance of counsel for failure to object to prison garb or restraints.
• Mosely v. State
  842 So. 2d 279· Fla. 3d DCA· 2003-04-16 ·cited 8×
  John Mosely appeals his conviction for strong armed robbery, challenging the trial court's restriction on defense counsel's individual voir dire questioning about the defense of misidentification. The court agrees that the restriction violated Mosely's right to a fair and imparti
• Tylo Mullins v. State
  766 So. 2d 1136· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-08-23 ·cited 8×
  Tylo Mullins appeals his convictions for first-degree murder and related crimes. The court affirms his convictions but identifies error in the trial court's refusal to allow a defense witness to change out of jail clothing before testifying, finding the error harmless beyond a re
• Cuevas v. State
  741 So. 2d 1234· Fla. 5th DCA· 1999-10-01 ·cited 8×
  The court concurred specially, finding the issue difficult, and discussed the supreme court's reaffirmation that truly inconsistent verdicts on legally interlocking charges cannot stand, while factually inconsistent verdicts may.
• United States v. Booker
  981 F.2d 289· 7th Cir.· 1992-12-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendants' trial counsel did not provide ineffective assistance, as their actions were either reasonable tactical decisions or did not result in prejudice to the defendants' cases.
• United States v. Greer
  968 F.2d 433· 5th Cir.· 1992-07-30 ·cited 8×
  The en banc court held that the district court did not err in refusing to strike all black, Hispanic, and Jewish jurors for cause and in its conduct of voir dire, as the means employed provided reasonable assurance that prejudice would be discovered if present.
• Hlad v. State
  565 So. 2d 762· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-07-19 ·cited 8×
  Albert Hlad, Jr. appealed his conviction for a fourth DUI offense, arguing that his prior 1978 DUI conviction was uncounseled and therefore could not be used to enhance his current conviction from a misdemeanor to a felony under the Sixth Amendment. The Florida Fifth District Cou
• Floyd v. Meachum
  907 F.2d 347· 2d Cir.· 1990-06-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the cumulative effect of the prosecutor's repeated and improper remarks during summation was so prejudicial as to render the trial fundamentally unfair, denying the defendant his constitutional due process rights.
• United States v. Turner
  892 F.2d 11· 1st Cir.· 1989-12-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a prosecutor's isolated, argumentative remark during rebuttal, when viewed in context and with curative jury instructions, did not constitute reversible error, nor did the admission of identification evidence that was not impermissibly suggestive.
• Kurina v. Thieret
  853 F.2d 1409· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-03 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding that most claims were waived due to procedural default without cause or prejudice, and the remaining claims lacked merit.
• United States v. Dwyer
  843 F.2d 60· 1st Cir.· 1988-04-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that while the evidence was sufficient, certain jury instructions cumulatively prejudiced the defendant, requiring a new trial.
• Thomas v. State
  494 So. 2d 248· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-09-03 ·cited 8×
  Curtis Lee Thomas appealed his conviction on multiple counts of robbery, sexual battery, and burglary with a firearm. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court properly admitted out-of-court and in-court identification evidence desp
• Palace Ent., Inc. v. Bituminous Cas. Corp.
  793 F.2d 842· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that an insurer asserting arson as an affirmative defense must prove it by a preponderance of the evidence, not clear and convincing evidence.
• 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. Brown
  763 F.2d 984· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the contract with the state Medicaid program constituted consent to warrantless inspections for fraud investigations, and that evidence was sufficient to convict on some counts but not others due to lack of proof of the defendant's involvement.
• United States v. Bailey
  763 F.2d 862· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction and that the jury instructions on joint venture were not prejudicial.
• Smith v. Procunier
  769 F.2d 170· 4th Cir.· 1985-05-10 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no constitutional error in the sentencing phase of the trial.
• United States v. Lexie Little Carter
  756 F.2d 310· 3d Cir.· 1985-03-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting government witnesses' testimony despite a Rule 12.1 violation, nor in admitting eyewitness identification testimony or denying a jury instruction on evidence quality.
• Trass v. Maggio
  731 F.2d 288· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that counsel's failure to move for severance, stemming from ignorance of the law, constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, entitling the petitioner to a new trial.
• Martin v. Strasburg
  689 F.2d 365· 2d Cir.· 1982-09-20 ·cited 8×
  New York's preventive detention law for accused juvenile delinquents is unconstitutional because it permits liberty to be denied prior to adjudication of guilt based on unfettered discretion and uncertain predictions of future behavior.
• United States v. Fine
  644 F.2d 1018· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court correctly determined that retrial of the defendants on the remaining counts was not barred by the Double Jeopardy clause.
• United States v. Colatriano
  624 F.2d 686· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying severance, admitting the roll of tape into evidence, or refusing to reinstruct the jury on the presumption of innocence and burden of proof.
• United States v. Coleman
  631 F.2d 908· D.C. Cir.· 1980-07-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that DEA forms and lock-seal envelopes containing skeletal information and prepared for chain of custody were admissible, and that notecards qualifying as statements of identification or prior consistent statements were also admissible. However, the court vacated c
• United States v. Trammel
  583 F.2d 1166· 10th Cir.· 1978-10-11 ·cited 8×
  The dissent argues that the majority's decision to erode the spousal testimonial privilege in conspiracy cases is unsound and contrary to established precedent, undermining family unity.
• Wright v. Smith
  569 F.2d 1188· 2d Cir.· 1978-01-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury instructions regarding the alibi defense, when viewed in their entirety and considering the defense counsel's actions, did not unconstitutionally shift the burden of proof to the defendant, thus not denying him due process.
• Coney v. State
  348 So. 2d 672· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-08-09 ·cited 8×
  Jimmy Lee Coney appeals his conviction on four serious felonies, including involuntary sexual battery of a child, robbery, burglary, and attempted premeditated murder, arguing various trial errors. The Third District Court of Appeal affirms the conviction and 130-year sentence, f
• United States v. Polk
  550 F.2d 1265· 10th Cir.· 1977-03-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its jury voir dire, admission of evidence, refusal of instructions, limitation of cross-examination, or sentencing, and that the defendant failed to preserve most issues for appeal.
• United States v. Greer
  538 F.2d 437· D.C. Cir.· 1976-06-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the case should be remanded for a new trial due to serious doubts about the validity of the original identification, compounded by newly discovered evidence and recanted testimony.
• Powell v. State
  335 So. 2d 304· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-06-29 ·cited 8×
  Powell appeals his conviction for felony firearm possession under Florida law. The court reverses because the circumstantial evidence, while consistent with guilt, was not inconsistent with a reasonable hypothesis of innocence, failing to meet the required standard of proof.