Rational Connection Test

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

• Pompey v. Cochran
  685 So. 2d 1007· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-01-08 ·cited 107×
  Pompey was incarcerated for civil contempt based on nonpayment of child support without any evidentiary showing that he possessed the ability to pay the purge amount set by the court. The Fourth District Court of Appeal granted habeas corpus relief, holding that the trial court's
• Sipes v. United States
  321 F.2d 174· 8th Cir.· 1963-07-17 ·cited 96×
  The court held that the National Firearms Act, specifically 26 U.S.C. § 5851, is constitutional and does not violate the Tenth or Fifth Amendments, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• Ambrose Badillo Caudillo v. United States
  253 F.2d 513· 9th Cir.· 1958-03-26 ·cited 82×
  The court held that the statutory presumption in 21 U.S.C.A. § 176a, which deems possession of marihuana sufficient evidence to authorize conviction unless explained to the jury's satisfaction, is constitutional. The court also held that the presumption was not defeated as a matt
• State v. Carlton Rolle
  560 So. 2d 1154· Fla.· 1990-03-01 ·cited 77×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the Fourth District Court of Appeal and upheld the constitutionality of Florida's drunk driving statute and jury instruction that allowed proof of a blood-alcohol level of 0.10% or higher to establish impairment. The Court held that the statute
• Esteban v. Cent. Mo. State Coll.
  415 F.2d 1077· 8th Cir.· 1969-08-28 ·cited 74×
  A federal court's review of student discipline under the Civil Rights Act requires a de novo trial on the merits of federal rights denial, not an "substantial evidence" review of the school's proceedings.
• Ala. By-Products Corp. v. Killingsworth
  733 F.2d 1511· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-08 ·cited 59×
  The court held that the "bursting bubble" theory does not apply to the presumption under 20 C.F.R. § 727.203(b), and the employer bears the burden of persuasion on rebuttal. The court also affirmed the constitutionality of the presumption.
• State v. Kahler
  232 So. 2d 166· Fla.· 1970-02-25 ·cited 58×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the trial court's decision striking down a statute creating a presumption that unlabeled drug possession is unlawful. The Court held that the prima facie evidence provision was constitutional because there is a rational connection between the fa
• Haywood Erwing v. United States
  323 F.2d 674· 9th Cir.· 1963-10-17 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the unexplained possession of cocaine hydrochloride is insufficient to support an inference of illegal importation, violating due process.
• Stevens v. United States
  440 F.2d 144· 6th Cir.· 1971-03-22 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the phrase 'in commerce or affecting commerce' modifies 'transports,' 'receives,' and 'possesses' in 18 U.S.C. § 1202(a)(1), requiring proof of such commerce for conviction.
• The United States v. Hilmer Burdette Sandini
  816 F.2d 869· 3d Cir.· 1987-04-01 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the district court erred by barring the defendant from testifying in the forfeiture proceedings, requiring a new trial on that issue. However, the court upheld the constitutionality of the statutory presumption and the preponderance of the evidence standard fo
• State v. Franco Ferrari and Charles Tarantino
  398 So. 2d 804· Fla.· 1981-04-02 ·cited 37×
  Florida Supreme Court held that section 713.34(3), a statute criminalizing embezzlement of construction funds by contractors, is not unconstitutionally vague, overbroad, or infirm in its presumption of intent to defraud. The decision reversed a trial court's dismissal of charges
• United States v. Liguori
  438 F.2d 663· 2d Cir.· 1971-02-16 ·cited 34×
  The court held that convictions based on statutory presumptions later found unconstitutional, where no proof was offered for essential elements of the crime, are fatally tainted by a lack of due process and should be vacated, even if the issue was not raised at trial.
• United States v. Black
  512 F.2d 864· 9th Cir.· 1975-03-11 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court erred in applying a statutory presumption to shift the burden of proof to the defendant regarding the medical exception for dispensing controlled substances.
• Carroll Robinson v. United States
  327 F.2d 618· 8th Cir.· 1964-02-06 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the defendant's challenge to the admissibility of evidence based on an allegedly unlawful arrest and search was procedurally barred because it was not raised in the trial court. The court also found no prejudicial error in the jury charge regarding marihuana a
• State v. Rygwelski
  899 So. 2d 498· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-04-22 ·cited 26×
  The State sought certiorari review of a trial court's order declaring section 812.155(4)(b) unconstitutional as a mandatory presumption relieving the State of its burden to prove fraudulent intent in a failure-to-return-leased-property prosecution. The appellate court held that t
• Kaiser Steel Corp. v. Dir., Off. OF Workers' Comp. Programs, United States Dep't OF Labor, & Jesse Sainz
  748 F.2d 1426· 10th Cir.· 1984-11-27 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Administrative Law Judge's findings were supported by substantial evidence and that the employer failed to rebut the interim presumption of disability under the Black Lung Benefits Act.
• McINERNEY v. Berman
  621 F.2d 20· 1st Cir.· 1980-05-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the jury instructions regarding the inference of malice from the intentional use of a deadly weapon did not impermissibly shift the burden of proof to the defendant, thus not violating due process.
• MacMILLAN v. State
  358 So. 2d 547· Fla.· 1978-04-27 ·cited 24×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed MacMillan's conviction for larceny of utility service, finding that the statutory presumption in Section 812.14(3)—which created a presumption of guilt based on possession of altered meters or receipt of utility benefits—violated due process as
• Barrett v. United States
  322 F.2d 292· 5th Cir.· 1963-09-05 ·cited 22×
  Statutory presumptions making unexplained presence at an unregistered still presumptive evidence of possession or carrying on the business of a distiller violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
• Manning v. United States
  274 F.2d 926· 5th Cir.· 1960-01-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the statutory presumption under 26 U.S.C.A. § 4744(a)(1) is constitutional, and evidence obtained by state officers in an illegal search is admissible in federal court.
• B.R. and W.C. v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs.
  558 So. 2d 1027· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-12-08 ·cited 20×
  B.R. and W.C., school employees, challenged their confirmation as child abusers following corporal punishment that left bruises. The court reversed the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services' reliance on a "twenty-four hour rule"—an evidentiary presumption that visible
• United States v. Vankirk Moore and Harold Burnell
  571 F.2d 76· 2d Cir.· 1978-01-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the statutory presumption of interstate transportation in 18 U.S.C. § 1201(b) is unconstitutional because there is no rational connection or substantial assurance that the presumed fact (interstate transport) is more likely than not to flow from the proved fac
• Hammontree v. Phelps
  605 F.2d 1371· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-07 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Louisiana statute creating a presumption of negligence from the violation of a statute is unconstitutional as applied, violating due process by shifting the burden of proof to the defendant.
• United States v. TOT
  131 F.2d 261· 3d Cir.· 1942-07-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the seizure of the firearm was lawful as incident to a lawful arrest, the statute's definition of 'firearm' was broad enough to include the pistol, the Second Amendment does not protect the right to possess such a firearm, and the statutory presumption of ille
• United States v. Wolters
  656 F.2d 523· 9th Cir.· 1981-09-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a taxpayer cannot generally rely on the Fifth Amendment to justify a complete failure to file an income tax return, and probation conditions requiring filing do not violate constitutional rights.
• Allen v. Cnty. Court
  568 F.2d 998· 2d Cir.· 1977-11-29 ·cited 14×
  The court affirms the district court's judgment, but the concurring opinion argues for affirming on the ground that the statute is unconstitutional as applied, not on its face.
• Dirk
  305 So. 2d 187· Fla.· 1974-05-29 ·cited 14×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Section 832.05, Florida Statutes, which criminalizes obtaining property by negotiating a worthless check. The court rejected the appellant's vagueness and other constitutional challenges, finding the statute provides suffi
• Port Norris Express Co., Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & United States
  697 F.2d 497· 3d Cir.· 1982-12-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Interstate Commerce Commission's decision to grant Allied Bulk Carriers, Inc. a certificate to operate as a common carrier was supported by substantial evidence and was not arbitrary or capricious.
• United States Steel Corp. v. Josephine Oravetz (Widow of Michael Oravetz) and Director
  686 F.2d 197· 3d Cir.· 1982-08-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the administrative law judge's finding of entitlement to black lung benefits was supported by substantial evidence, and the statutory presumption of disability is constitutional.
• United States v. Armand Matalon
  425 F.2d 70· 2d Cir.· 1970-04-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the statutory presumption in 18 U.S.C. § 545, authorizing conviction for possession of illegally imported goods unless explained, was constitutional as applied to the appellant given the overwhelming evidence of his knowledge of illegal importation.
• Cordova v. State
  675 So. 2d 632· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-05-29 ·cited 10×
  Victor Cordova appeals his conviction for indirect criminal contempt for violating a domestic violence injunction, challenging the trial court's use of judicial notice to establish that he was served with the injunction. The court affirms the conviction, holding that while judici
• Marcolini v. State
  673 So. 2d 3· Fla.· 1996-01-18 ·cited 10×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that the current version of Florida's electricity theft statute, section 812.14(3), creates a constitutional permissive inference rather than an unconstitutional mandatory rebuttable presumption. The Court reversed the Fourth District's decision and
• Kaiser Steel Corp. v. Dir., Off. OF Workers' Comp. Programs, United States Dep't OF Labor & Alfonso Sena
  757 F.2d 1078· 10th Cir.· 1985-03-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the administrative law judge's invocation and failure to rebut the interim presumption of disability due to pneumoconiosis were supported by substantial evidence, and the interim presumption itself is constitutional.
• 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
• McKEAND v. Laird
  490 F.2d 1262· 9th Cir.· 1973-10-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the denial of a security clearance was supported by substantial evidence, including findings that the applicant's homosexuality posed a threat of disclosure of classified information due to potential coercion.
• Pugliese v. United States
  343 F.2d 837· 1st Cir.· 1965-04-13 ·cited 8×
• Benton v. United States
  232 F.2d 341· D.C. Cir.· 1956-03-01 ·cited 8×
• Minski v. United States
  131 F.2d 614· 6th Cir.· 1942-12-02 ·cited 8×
  Statutory presumptions in the Federal Firearms Act, requiring proof of one fact to be presumptive evidence of another, are unconstitutional if they lack a rational connection between the proved and presumed facts, violating the Fifth Amendment's due process clause.
• Alexie Ibarrondo v. State
  1 So. 3d 226· Fla. 5th DCA· 2008-12-24 ·cited 6×
  Alexie Ibarrondo appeals his conviction for felony driving under the influence with three prior DUI convictions and driving while license suspended with two prior convictions. The appellate court reverses and remands for a new trial due to two trial court errors: seating a biased
• Fugate v. Phoenix Civil Serv. Bd.
  791 F.2d 736· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the officers' extramarital relationships were not protected by the constitutional right of privacy because the conduct was not purely private and the officers failed to demonstrate a reasonable expectation of privacy.
• Hamilton v. State
  329 So. 2d 283· Fla.· 1976-02-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Section 509.151, Florida Statutes, which creates a prima facie presumption of intent to defraud for failure to pay for lodging after demand, is constitutional.
• United States v. Armenteros
  452 F.2d 1177· 5th Cir.· 1971-12-30 ·cited 6×
  The statutory presumption of knowledge of illegal importation from possession of a large quantity of cocaine is constitutional, especially when supported by independent evidence of knowledge.
• Johnson v. United States
  422 F.2d 555· 7th Cir.· 1970-01-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the statutory presumption of guilt from possession of heroin under 21 U.S.C. § 174 is constitutional, and the defendant received effective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Simeon Jessamy Coke
  364 F.2d 484· 2d Cir.· 1966-07-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the statutory presumption of illegal importation and knowledge from possession of cocaine hydrochloride is constitutional, as the submitted statistics were insufficient to disprove a rational connection.
• State v. Marcolini
  664 So. 2d 963· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-02-01 ·cited 5×
  Florida appealed the dismissal of a theft of electricity charge after the trial court held unconstitutional a statute providing that possession of a device bypassing an electric meter is prima facie evidence of the crime. The appellate court reversed, holding that the statute cre
• 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.
• Crowley v. Winans
  920 F.2d 454· 7th Cir.· 1990-12-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury instruction creating a permissive presumption of great bodily harm based on the victim's physical disability, specifically his height, did not violate due process because there was a rational connection between the victim's height and the increased pr
• McCANDLESS v. Beyer
  835 F.2d 58· 3d Cir.· 1987-12-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the permissive presumption statute N.J.S.A. 2C:39-2b, which allows a jury to presume the absence of a carrying permit from possession of a firearm, does not violate due process because there is a rational connection between the basic and ultimate facts presume
• N. Am. Coal Corp. v. Ida Campbell (Widow of Lawrence Campbell)
  748 F.2d 1124· 6th Cir.· 1984-11-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the administrative law judge's finding of partial disability was supported by substantial evidence and that the Black Lung Benefits Act's presumption provision is constitutional and applicable to the claim.
• United States v. Ballard
  449 F.2d 782· 4th Cir.· 1971-10-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge's participation and jury instruction regarding the inference from possession of recently stolen property were not reversible error.