Presumption Of Innocence

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

• United States v. Greene
  995 F.2d 793· 8th Cir.· 1993-04-30 ·cited 3×
  The court held that excluding individuals charged but not convicted of felonies from jury service is rationally related to the government's interest in ensuring juror integrity and impartiality, and that statements made during plea negotiations are generally inadmissible hearsay.
• Williams v. Wainwright
  39 C.C.A. 491· S.D. Fla.· 1984-01-12 ·cited 3×
  A habeas petitioner must present the substance of a federal constitutional claim to the state courts, including the factual and legal premises, to satisfy the exhaustion requirement.
• McGEE v. State
  304 So. 2d 142· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-10-23 ·cited 3×
  The dissenting opinion argues that multiple procedural errors, including improper joinder of offenses and defendants and failure to provide independent counsel, necessitate reversal.
• Fleming v. State
  366 So. 3d 1179· Fla. 1st DCA· 2023-05-24 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court affirmed a conviction, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying challenges for cause against two prospective jurors. The court found that while the jurors expressed personal beliefs about testifying, they ultimately affirmed they co
• Phelps v. State
  317 So. 3d 1207· Fla. 3d DCA· 2021-02-24 ·cited 2×
  Appellate counsel's failure to raise fundamental error in the trial court's omission of the standard jury instruction on reasonable doubt constitutes ineffective assistance of appellate counsel requiring reversal and a new trial.
• Lynch v. State
  260 So. 3d 1166· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-12-27 ·cited 2×
  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the officers' identifications, denying Brady relief, revoking Lynch's self-representation right, or in its handling of Lynch's appearance in shackles and prison clothes during jury selection.
• Inquiry Concerning a Judge No. 16-534 RE: Dana Marie Santino.
  257 So. 3d 25· Fla.· 2018-10-19 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court removed Dana Marie Santino from her office as a Palm Beach County judge for making false and misleading statements about her opponent during her 2016 judicial campaign. Santino's campaign characterized her opponent as representing criminals and murderers
• Rayquan Burgess v. State
  248 So. 3d 131· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-05-09 ·cited 2×
  The trial court's erroneous denial of two cause challenges during jury selection constitutes reversible error when the defendant exhausts peremptory challenges and an objectionable juror serves on the jury, particularly when the court fails to grant sufficient additional perempto
• Caldwell v. State
  50 So. 3d 1234· Fla. 2d DCA· 2011-01-14 ·cited 2×
  Caldwell was convicted of felony murder and armed burglary but appeals, arguing the trial court improperly denied his challenge for cause to a juror (Juror E) whose comments suggested she would view a defendant's decision not to testify as evidence of guilt. The appellate court r
• Tabares v. State
  24 So. 3d 1205· Fla. 3d DCA· 2009-12-23 ·cited 2×
  Jorge Tabares appeals his conviction for grand theft, arguing the trial court erred in denying his challenges for cause against five prospective jurors whose responses raised reasonable doubt about their impartiality. The court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that
• Cassidy v. McNeil
  621 F. Supp. 2d 1222· M.D. Fla.· 2008-06-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the state court's adjudication of Petitioner's claim regarding the pocketknife as a deadly weapon was not contrary to federal law and was based on a reasonable determination of the facts.
• Arino v. State
  944 So. 2d 1120· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-12-01 ·cited 2×
  Appellant was convicted of driving with a revoked license as a habitual traffic offender and appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to bifurcate the trial. The court affirmed, holding that bifurcation was improper because the habitual traffic offender designation was an
• Ramirez v. State
  901 So. 2d 332· Fla. 3d DCA· 2005-05-04 ·cited 2×
  The trial court erred by imposing restrictions on individual voir dire, preventing defense counsel from questioning prospective jurors on crucial areas like reasonable doubt and presumption of innocence.
• State v. Torres
  890 So. 2d 292· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-12-03 ·cited 2×
  The State appealed the trial court's dismissal of charges against Jason Torres for lewd or lascivious battery, arguing the court erred in finding that a pretrial counseling condition violated the Double Jeopardy Clause. The appellate court reversed, holding that jeopardy had not
• Smith v. State
  762 So. 2d 969· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-05-31 ·cited 2×
  Smith sought post-conviction relief claiming ineffective assistance of appellate counsel for failing to argue the correct harmless error standard under Chapman-DiGuilio-Goodwin analysis. The Fourth District agreed that appellate counsel's failure to challenge the lower court's im
• Henderson v. State
  708 So. 2d 642· Fla. 1st DCA· 1998-04-02 ·cited 2×
  Henderson, a defendant in a capital murder case, sought public records from the sheriff regarding his case through the Public Records Act rather than through criminal discovery. The trial court ruled this constituted participation in discovery, triggering reciprocal discovery obl
• United States v. Parker
  997 F.2d 219· 6th Cir.· 1993-07-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err by not giving a voluntariness instruction for a confession when the defendant did not request it or object to its introduction.
• Castillo v. Stainer
  983 F.2d 145· 9th Cir.· 1992-12-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while the trial court erred in failing to follow proper procedures for shackling the defendant, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the restraints were not visible to the jury and did not impede the defendant's ability to communicate with
• Blanco v. State
  603 So. 2d 132· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-08-11 ·cited 2×
  A 15-year-old defendant was tried as an adult for armed robbery and convicted by jury. The appellate court affirmed his conviction and adult sentence, rejecting his claims that courtroom shackling during jury selection and trial violated his rights and that adult sentencing was i
• McLEAN v. Moran
  963 F.2d 1306· 9th Cir.· 1992-05-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the application of Nev.Rev.Stat. § 484.381(1) as a mandatory conclusive presumption violated the petitioner's due process right to have the state prove every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Pierson v. O'Leary
  959 F.2d 1385· 7th Cir.· 1992-04-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that prosecutorial misconduct and the admission of victim impact evidence did not deny the defendant due process, and that federal habeas corpus relief was unavailable for Fourth Amendment claims due to the state's opportunity for full and fair litigation. The cour
• Bellamy v. State
  594 So. 2d 337· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-02-27 ·cited 2×
  Robert Bellamy appealed his sexual battery conviction on the grounds that allowing the victim to remain in the courtroom during trial pursuant to Florida's victim rights constitutional amendment violated his due process rights. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed the conv
• United States v. Dockery
  955 F.2d 50· D.C. Cir.· 1992-01-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to sever the ex-felon count, and by allowing the government to use the prior conviction in cross-examining a defense witness, leading to undue prejudice against the defendant.
• United States v. Wilson
  954 F.2d 374· 6th Cir.· 1992-01-21 ·cited 2×
  The court is constrained by circuit precedent to affirm the district court's decision to increase the defendant's sentence based on unconvicted conduct.
• United States v. Ulrich
  953 F.2d 1082· 8th Cir.· 1991-12-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its rulings regarding the presumption of innocence, the defendant's defense, or sentencing, and affirmed the conviction and sentence.
• Cain v. Redman
  947 F.2d 817· 6th Cir.· 1991-10-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner could not retroactively apply the Supreme Court's decision in Sandstrom v. Montana to his conviction because it announced a new rule of law that does not fall within the Teague v. Lane exceptions, and any error in the jury instructions was harml
• Morgan v. Bernie Aispuro
  946 F.2d 1462· 9th Cir.· 1991-10-15 ·cited 2×
  The use of a security courtroom, absent actual prejudice, is not inherently prejudicial and does not violate a defendant's right to a fair trial.
• Fitzgerald v. Thompson
  943 F.2d 463· 4th Cir.· 1991-08-26 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition, finding no error in the conviction or sentencing.
• Gatlin v. State
  556 So. 2d 772· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-02-08 ·cited 2×
  Willie Gatlin appealed his cocaine possession conviction, challenging jury instructions on permissive presumptions regarding knowledge of drug possession. The Florida appellate court affirmed, holding that the instruction using permissive language ('may infer') did not create an
• United States v. Afolabi K. Eniola
  D.D.C.· 1990-01-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a protective order barring defense counsel from discussing a potential witness's status as a government informant with their client violated the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel for one appellant, but not the other.
• United States v. Fotovich
  885 F.2d 241· 5th Cir.· 1989-09-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury instruction stating the jury's task was to decide guilt or innocence was not reversible error when viewed in the context of the entire charge and trial.
• Paster v. Lynaugh
  876 F.2d 1184· 5th Cir.· 1989-06-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally barred or unsupported by the record, and thus denied his motions for a certificate of probable cause and a stay of execution.
• United States v. Nicholson
  846 F.2d 277· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court's security measures, including concealed leg restraints and plainclothes guards, were reasonable and constitutionally permissible given the defendant's history of violence.
• Alexander v. Foltz
  838 F.2d 140· 6th Cir.· 1988-01-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that erroneous jury instructions regarding the presumption of intent and implied malice were not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, entitling the petitioner to a new trial.
• Grover E. Rabon, Jr. v. Great Sw. Fire Ins. Co.
  818 F.2d 306· 4th Cir.· 1987-05-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error by admitting evidence related to a criminal arson case, as the objecting party had "opened the door" to the topic and failed to properly object to jury instructions.
• United States v. Carter
  815 F.2d 1230· 8th Cir.· 1987-04-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in approving security measures, as they were justified by the defendant's history and implemented without prejudice.
• Mabry Milton Murphy v. State
  495 So. 2d 1237· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-10-22 ·cited 2×
  Murphy was charged with five counts including attempted murder, shooting into an occupied vehicle, aggravated assault, and firearm possession by a convicted felon. He was convicted of aggravated battery, the shooting count, and the felon in possession charge. On appeal, Murphy ch
• Lennon Williford v. Young
  779 F.2d 405· 7th Cir.· 1985-12-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied the habeas corpus petition because the state trial court's failure to instruct on a lesser included offense, the alleged ineffective assistance of counsel, and the jury instructions on intoxication did not violate due proces
• Griffin v. Wainwright
  588 F. Supp. 1549· M.D. Fla.· 1984-03-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were without merit, and therefore denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus and the application for a stay of execution.
• Gov't OF the Virgin Islands v. Ralston Greene
  712 F.2d 824· 3d Cir.· 1983-07-20 ·cited 2×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, finding no merit in the argument that the decision would improperly chill police conduct.
• Holifield v. Davis
  662 F.2d 710· 11th Cir.· 1981-11-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding mistaken identification, denial of voir dire, witness's use of 'mug shots,' and illegal arrest did not rise to the level of constitutional error.
• United States v. Braziel
  609 F.2d 236· 5th Cir.· 1980-01-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge's intervention during closing arguments was proper and did not violate the defendant's constitutional rights.
• Harris v. State
  334 So. 2d 316· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-06-18 ·cited 2×
  Harris was convicted of manslaughter by intoxication after his truck struck and killed a child. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed his conviction, holding that the charging information failed to allege the statutory requirement that Harris was "while intoxicated" rathe
• Reynolds v. State
  332 So. 2d 27· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-04-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred by failing to fully repeat its jury instructions on the presumption of innocence and the State's burden of proof when requested by the jury.
• Wallace v. State
  330 So. 2d 516· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-04-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that circumstantial evidence presented was insufficient to exclude reasonable hypotheses of innocence, and thus could not sustain a conviction for grand larceny.
• Griner v. State
  322 So. 2d 647· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-12-05 ·cited 2×
  Appellant appealed his conviction for withholding child support payments. The appellate court reversed the conviction, holding that the state failed to prove willful withholding and failed to establish that the minor child was in need of support, both elements required for convic
• United States ex rel. George King v. Hon. Theodore Schubin
  522 F.2d 527· 2d Cir.· 1975-09-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant was not denied effective assistance of counsel or a fair trial, and thus the writ of habeas corpus was correctly denied.
• The N. Am. Coal Corp. v. United Mine Workers OF Am.
  512 F.2d 238· 6th Cir.· 1975-02-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the criminal contempt convictions of over 700 miners were invalid due to fundamental due process violations, including lack of proper notice, failure to state essential facts, and improper burden of proof.
• DeCHAMPLAIN v. Col. Hewitt E. Lovelace, Jr.
  510 F.2d 419· 8th Cir.· 1975-02-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) procedures for pretrial confinement violate due process by not providing a neutral decision-maker, a hearing, or placing the burden of proof on the government.
• United States v. Shultz
  482 F.2d 1179· 6th Cir.· 1973-07-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant on both counts of mail fraud and interstate transport of counterfeit tapes, and that the admission of certain testimony and a judge's remark were not reversible error.