Presumption Of Innocence

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

• Gibbs v. State
  193 So. 2d 460· Fla. 2d DCA· 1967-01-06 ·cited 56×
  Defendant Gibbs was convicted of second-degree murder in the shooting death of Robert Earl Catrett following a property dispute. The Florida appellate court reversed due to cumulative trial errors, including improper jury voir dire examination, admission of inadmissible witness o
• United States v. Standard OIL Co.
  316 F.2d 884· 7th Cir.· 1963-04-22 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the trial court erred by unduly restricting the cross-examination of government witnesses and by refusing to permit defendants' employees to directly deny making agreements, which errors were prejudicial.
• Fogler v. State
  96 Fla. 68· Fla.· 1928-06-26 ·cited 56×
  Marion Fogler was convicted of manslaughter on an indictment charging murder in the first degree. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting arguments that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that the defendant's failure to testify could not be held ag
• United States v. Moore
  954 F.3d 1322· 11th Cir.· 2020-03-31 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the district court did not err in shackling the defendants, mishandling a jury note, or in its application of Rehaif v. United States, affirming the convictions.
• Eldridge v. State
  27 Fla. 162· Fla.· 1891-01-01 ·cited 55×
  Louis H. Eldridge, the publisher of the DeLand Weekly News, was convicted of criminal libel for publishing articles about Della Y. Smith that alleged her adultery. The Florida Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial court committed multiple evi
• Bryant v. State
  785 So. 2d 422· Fla.· 2001-04-05 ·cited 54×
  Byron Bryant was convicted of first-degree murder and armed robbery in the killing of Leonard Andre during an armed robbery at Andre's Market. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Bryant's death sentence, rejecting challenges to his competency, the use of visible restraints during
• Jones v. State
  656 So. 2d 489· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-02-01 ·cited 54×
  David Jones appealed his conviction for attempted burglary of a conveyance and resisting an officer after a jury trial. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial judge's extemporaneous instructions on reasonable doubt imperm
• Tilden N. Engle v. Koehler
  707 F.2d 241· 6th Cir.· 1983-05-09 ·cited 54×
  Jury instructions that could have shifted the burden of proof on malice and intent to the defendant are unconstitutional under Sandstrom v. Montana and are not harmless error when the defense is lack of mens rea.
• United States v. Moccia
  681 F.2d 61· 1st Cir.· 1982-06-16 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the admission of a prior conviction for impeachment purposes was proper under Rule 404(b) and that the jury instructions regarding lesser included offenses were adequate. The court also affirmed the enhanced sentence under the Dangerous Special Drug Offender s
• United States v. Hammonds
  425 F.2d 597· D.C. Cir.· 1970-03-30 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the totality of counsel's omissions and errors, particularly the closing argument, constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, requiring a new trial.
• Harding v. United States
  337 F.2d 254· 8th Cir.· 1964-10-21 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the appellant's assignments of error were not properly preserved for review due to failure to make timely and specific objections, and that no plain error was committed.
• Emil Richard Yates v. United States
  316 F.2d 718· 10th Cir.· 1963-04-29 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the lower court did not err in denying the motion without a hearing because the record conclusively showed the appellant was not entitled to relief, and his constitutional rights were not violated.
• Baker v. United States
  310 F.2d 924· 9th Cir.· 1962-11-20 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the admission of testimony concerning independent crimes to show intent was proper, and that the jury instructions, while not perfect, did not constitute plain error affecting substantial rights.
• Mar Gong v. Brownell
  209 F.2d 448· 9th Cir.· 1954-01-12 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the trial court erred in rejecting the plaintiff's claim of U.S. citizenship based on minor discrepancies and its experience in similar cases, rather than solely on the evidence presented.
• Demetree v. United States
  207 F.2d 892· 5th Cir.· 1953-11-24 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the trial judge's colloquies and instructions to the jury regarding punishment, which suggested leniency and induced a verdict, constituted reversible error.
• United States v. Robinson
  651 F.2d 1188· 6th Cir.· 1981-06-09 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for aiding and abetting mail and wire fraud was valid, and that the prosecutor's closing arguments were not improper comments on the defendant's failure to testify.
• United States v. Brown
  484 F.2d 418· 5th Cir.· 1973-08-22 ·cited 52×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding the warrantless wiretap was a legal foreign intelligence operation.
• United States v. Burnell Robinson
  406 F.2d 64· 7th Cir.· 1969-01-10 ·cited 52×
  References to 'mug shots' during trial did not constitute reversible error because the trial court provided a comprehensive limiting instruction to the jury, and the identification procedure was not impermissibly suggestive.
• United States v. England
  347 F.2d 425· 7th Cir.· 1965-04-12 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the trial judge erred in instructing the jury that tax assessments were valid as a matter of law, because the validity of the assessment, particularly concerning fraud and the statute of limitations, presented a factual question for the jury.
• Chappell v. United States
  270 F.2d 274· 9th Cir.· 1959-08-11 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the services and labor of a military member are not a 'thing of value' under 18 U.S.C. § 641, and a jury instruction creating a presumption of criminal intent was misleading.
• Segal v. United States
  246 F.2d 814· 8th Cir.· 1957-08-06 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for subornation of perjury, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• United States v. Postma
  242 F.2d 488· 2d Cir.· 1957-02-21 ·cited 52×
  The court denied petitions for rehearing, finding no fatal variance in the conspiracy charge and that evidence was properly admitted. The court also stayed the mandate pending a certiorari application.
• State v. Blair
  39 So. 3d 1190· Fla.· 2010-06-03 ·cited 51×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between district courts regarding pretrial detention standards. The Court held that trial courts cannot order pretrial detention based solely on finding a defendant's failure to appear was willful; instead, courts must determine wheth
• In re Forfeiture Hearing AS TO Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered v. Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered
  837 F.2d 637· 4th Cir.· 1988-01-11 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the defendant's attorneys had no Sixth Amendment right to assert a claim to seized funds, as their rights could not exceed the defendant's own limited rights.
• United States v. Alejo Maldonado Medina
  761 F.2d 12· 1st Cir.· 1985-04-26 ·cited 51×
  The court held that evidence of a prior kidnapping was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and as proof of an overt act, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting coconspirator statements or in its handling of pretrial publicity and jury i
• United States v. Parr
  716 F.2d 796· 11th Cir.· 1983-09-19 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the seizure of currency during a fire investigation was permissible under exigent circumstances, and the evidence was sufficient to establish intent to defraud.
• Elijah "Tootie Pie" Cosby, Jr. v. Jones
  682 F.2d 1373· 11th Cir.· 1982-08-16 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the inference of guilt from recent possession of stolen goods, without corroborating evidence, is insufficient to support a burglary conviction under the Jackson v. Virginia standard.
• Wall v. United States
  384 F.2d 758· 10th Cir.· 1967-11-01 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding of intent to defraud, and that procedural and evidentiary challenges lacked merit.
• United States v. Carmine Persico, Jr.
  349 F.2d 6· 2d Cir.· 1965-07-23 ·cited 50×
  The court held that errors in the jury charge, particularly regarding witness credibility and prior inconsistent statements, prejudiced the defendants and required reversal.
• Brubaker v. United States
  183 F.2d 894· 6th Cir.· 1950-08-10 ·cited 50×
  The admission of revolvers found in the defendant's suitcase was prejudicial error, requiring reversal and remand for a new trial.
• Albritton v. State
  32 Fla. 358· Fla.· 1893-06-01 ·cited 50×
  This case reviews a conviction for larceny where the appellant, Henry Albritton, was charged as a principal in the second degree for aiding and abetting his co-defendant, Andrew Albritton. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding no reversible error in the trial court
• Wooten v. State
  24 Fla. 335· Fla.· 1888-06-01 ·cited 50×
  A. L. Wooten was convicted of unlawfully maintaining a gambling room in Jacksonville under Florida law. The Florida Supreme Court upheld his conviction, rejecting constitutional challenges to a statute that makes the finding of gambling implements prima facie evidence of maintain
• Kennedy v. Cardwell
  487 F.2d 101· 6th Cir.· 1973-10-30 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the state trial judge did not abuse his discretion in ordering the petitioner shackled during his trials, as the petitioner failed to meet his burden of proof in the habeas corpus proceeding.
• Hilliard v. United States
  121 F.2d 992· 4th Cir.· 1941-07-21 ·cited 49×
  The court held that while admitting hearsay testimony from a maid was an error, it was not prejudicial. Other evidentiary rulings and jury instructions were deemed proper.
• United States v. Hunt
  794 F.2d 1095· 5th Cir.· 1986-07-25 ·cited 48×
  The court held that a trial judge's refusal to give a specific jury instruction is not reversible error if the instructions, taken as a whole and in the context of the trial, fairly and adequately cover the issues and allow the defendant to present their defense.
• United States v. Fleet Wallace Maull
  773 F.2d 1479· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-09 ·cited 48×
  The district court erred by converting a defendant's motion to amend bail conditions into a sua sponte detention hearing, exceeding its statutory review authority under the Bail Reform Act.
• McCRAE v. Louie L. Wainwright
  439 So. 2d 868· Fla.· 1983-09-15 ·cited 48×
  James McCrae, a death row inmate, petitioned for habeas corpus relief challenging his conviction for first-degree murder and death sentence. The Florida Supreme Court rejected all three claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and denial of due process, holding that issues not
• United States v. Fearn
  589 F.2d 1316· 7th Cir.· 1978-12-29 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the corpus delicti was not sufficiently proved because there was no independent evidence to bolster the defendant's alleged admissions.
• United States v. Zarattini
  552 F.2d 753· 7th Cir.· 1977-03-30 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the grand jury process was not abused, discovery rules were followed, evidentiary rulings were proper, and jury instructions were adequate, leading to the affirmance of the convictions.
• United States v. Lamont S. Carter
  522 F.2d 666· D.C. Cir.· 1975-07-18 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the warrantless search of appellant Patterson's attic was unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, and the admission of seized items was error. It also found that the jury instruction allowing inference of guilt from possession of stolen property was erroneous
• Smith v. United States
  418 F.2d 1120· D.C. Cir.· 1969-05-07 ·cited 48×
  The court held that consecutive sentences for assault with intent to kill and assault with a dangerous weapon arising from a single incident are improper, and that while a significant pre-trial delay occurred, dismissal was not required without a showing of prejudice to the defen
• United States v. McCORKLE
  248 F.2d 1· 3d Cir.· 1957-08-06 ·cited 48×
  The court held that a juror's prior experience with armed robbery, coupled with the prosecutor's appeal to the jury's fear of robbery, rendered the juror biased, violating due process and making the death sentence intolerable.
• Wesson v. United States
  172 F.2d 931· 8th Cir.· 1949-03-03 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence presented was insufficient to sustain a conviction for narcotic law violations, as it was equally consistent with innocence.
• Richard v. State
  42 Fla. 528· Fla.· 1900-06-01 ·cited 48×
  R. R. Richard was convicted of manslaughter for shooting A. J. Kite, a marshal attempting to arrest his brother. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that dying declarations were properly admitted, that jury instructions on self-defense and defense of others
• United States v. Thier
  801 F.2d 1463· 5th Cir.· 1986-10-10 ·cited 47×
  The court should require the district court to allow defendants access to funds for defense and living expenses unless the government shows a compelling reason.
• United States v. Strauss
  678 F.2d 886· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-11 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the trial court's jury instructions and admission of coconspirator statements were not reversible error, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• Marcera v. Chinlund
  595 F.2d 1231· 2d Cir.· 1979-02-27 ·cited 47×
  The dissenting judge argues that the court should not mandate a statewide 'contact' visitation program for jails without clearly defining the constitutional right involved and considering the significant costs and administrative burdens.
• Feeley v. Sampson
  570 F.2d 364· 1st Cir.· 1978-01-18 ·cited 47×
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority's standard for evaluating conditions of confinement for pretrial detainees is too deferential and rejects established case law.
• United States v. Holland
  810 F.2d 1215· D.C. Cir.· 1987-02-06 ·cited 46×
  The statute criminalizing drug distribution within 1,000 feet of a school (21 U.S.C. sec. 845a) is constitutional as applied, and does not violate equal protection or due process principles.
• United States v. Lanza
  790 F.2d 1015· 2d Cir.· 1986-05-07 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient for conviction, witness testimony was not unduly prejudicial, severance was not warranted, evidentiary rulings limiting cross-examination were within the trial court's discretion, and jury instructions on conscious avoidance were ap