Right To Confrontation

1,397 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 183 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Herring
  582 F.2d 535· 10th Cir.· 1978-07-17 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the stop and search of the truck were based on probable cause, the admission of a witness statement did not violate discovery agreements, severance was not required, the arrest and search of Chapman's motel room were lawful, and in-court identifications were r
• United States v. Espinoza
  578 F.2d 224· 9th Cir.· 1978-05-01 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of a prior similar act and that the stop of the truck was based on reasonable suspicion.
• United States v. Price
  577 F.2d 1356· 9th Cir.· 1978-03-09 ·cited 30×
  The court held that erroneous limitation of cross-examination is not per se reversible error, but is tested by the harmless error standard. The information sought by cross-examination was adequately presented to the jury through other means.
• United States v. Verne Allen Lyon
  567 F.2d 777· 8th Cir.· 1977-12-09 ·cited 30×
  The court held that evidence seized under a search warrant must be suppressed because the affidavit supporting the warrant failed to establish probable cause. The court affirmed the bail jumping conviction.
• United States v. Alvarez-Lopez
  559 F.2d 1155· 9th Cir.· 1977-08-25 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court committed prejudicial error of constitutional dimension by refusing to permit the defendant to inquire into the government's star witness' prior arrest for smuggling narcotics, thereby curtailing cross-examination.
• United States v. Calhoun
  544 F.2d 291· 6th Cir.· 1976-11-02 ·cited 30×
  The court held that admitting testimony from a defendant's parole officer to identify him in a surveillance photograph was an abuse of discretion and not harmless error.
• United States v. Pasquale Charles Marzano
  537 F.2d 257· 7th Cir.· 1976-05-18 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the FBI's active participation in the search and seizure of evidence by foreign officials violated the defendants' Fourth Amendment rights, requiring suppression of the evidence.
• United States v. Gould
  536 F.2d 216· 8th Cir.· 1976-05-06 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court did not err in taking judicial notice of cocaine hydrochloride as a Schedule II controlled substance and instructing the jury to accept this fact as conclusive, nor did it err in refusing to strike a co-conspirator's testimony despite his in
• Cameron v. Fastoff
  543 F.2d 971· 2d Cir.· 1976-04-22 ·cited 30×·via Confrontation Of Witnesses
  The court held that petitioners failed to exhaust state remedies for their federal constitutional claims, but affirmed the dismissal on the merits for the claim regarding probable cause for the search warrants.
• United States v. Prieto
  505 F.2d 8· 5th Cir.· 1974-12-16 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the jury convictions, finding sufficient evidence and no reversible error in the trial court's rulings.
• Meller v. State OF Mo.
  431 F.2d 120· 8th Cir.· 1970-08-17 ·cited 30×·via Right To Confront Accusers
  The court held that the defendant's 1952 guilty plea and waiver of counsel were voluntary and intelligent, and that the Boykin v. Alabama decision should not be applied retroactively.
• Alverez v. Turner
  422 F.2d 214· 10th Cir.· 1970-02-20 ·cited 30×
  The court held that parole revocation hearings do not require the full due process rights afforded in criminal trials, such as confrontation, cross-examination, or compulsory process, but equal protection may be violated by discretionary practices regarding witnesses.
• United States v. Catino
  403 F.2d 491· 2d Cir.· 1968-11-19 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in denying severance motions, admitting evidence, or denying the right to proceed pro se.
• Cohen v. The United States
  369 F.2d 976· Ct. Cl.· 1966-12-16 ·cited 30×
  The court held that former customs inspectors were not entitled to recover back pay for illegal suspension and discharge, as their dismissals were based on substantiated charges of misconduct and false statements.
• United States v. Alpheus Holiday
  319 F.2d 775· 2d Cir.· 1963-06-28 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the appellant's contentions for setting aside his conviction were without merit and affirmed the denial of his motion.
• Miller v. Miller
  671 So. 2d 849· Fla. 5th DCA· 1996-04-12 ·cited 29×·via Right To Confront Accusers
  In this family law appeal, the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's modification of child custody from father to mother, holding that the trial court committed reversible error by refusing to allow cross-examination of the Guardian Ad Litem whose report was p
• Chavis v. State OF N.C.
  637 F.2d 213· 4th Cir.· 1980-12-04 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the prosecution's failure to disclose a key witness's amended statement and psychiatric report violated the petitioners' due process rights.
• Barnes v. State
  124 So. 3d 904· Fla.· 2013-06-27 ·cited 28×
  James Phillip Barnes, sentenced to death for a 1988 murder, appealed the denial of his initial Rule 3.851 motion for postconviction relief. Barnes claimed the trial court should have sua sponte ordered a competency evaluation before allowing him to plead guilty, despite his discl
• Garcia v. State
  816 So. 2d 554· Fla.· 2002-04-18 ·cited 28×
  Garcia was convicted of murdering Mario Amador and Roberto Alfonso and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court reversed his convictions and death sentences, finding multiple critical errors including improper exclusion of impeachment evidence against the key witness Ribera,
• Garlington v. O'Leary
  879 F.2d 277· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-17 ·cited 28×
  The admission of a codefendant's statement as a coconspirator's statement did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, and the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• United States v. Springer
  831 F.2d 781· 8th Cir.· 1987-10-20 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motions for judgment of acquittal and that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation was not violated.
• Buckley v. Butler
  825 F.2d 895· 5th Cir.· 1987-08-27 ·cited 28×·via Right To Confront Accusers
  The court held that the record sufficiently demonstrated that the defendant's admission of prior convictions in the multiple bill proceeding was intelligent and voluntary, satisfying any applicable Boykin-type requirements.
• United States v. Ricks
  776 F.2d 455· 4th Cir.· 1985-10-10 ·cited 28×
  The dissenting judge holds that defense counsel's failure to seek clarification on jury selection procedures was unreasonable, and therefore the convictions should be affirmed.
• Haber v. Louie L. Wainwright
  756 F.2d 1520· 11th Cir.· 1985-04-08 ·cited 28×
  The court held that while the trial court's restriction on cross-examination regarding prior burglaries was likely harmless error, a remand is necessary to determine if the state failed to disclose an understanding or agreement with a key witness regarding prior crimes, which cou
• United States v. Wilson
  732 F.2d 404· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-04 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, or procedural decisions, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict.
• Ellis v. Black
  732 F.2d 650· 8th Cir.· 1984-04-24 ·cited 28×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding sufficient evidence to support the manslaughter conviction and no constitutional error in the admission of evidence or prosecutorial conduct.
• United States v. Young
  736 F.2d 565· 10th Cir.· 1983-02-22 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the admission of out-of-court statements by a deceased accountant was proper under the Federal Rules of Evidence, but reversed the conviction due to prosecutorial misconduct during closing arguments.
• Conway v. Anderson
  698 F.2d 282· 6th Cir.· 1983-01-21 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a jury instruction creating a mandatory presumption of intent, similar to that in Sandstrom v. Montana, was harmless error in this case because the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrated the perpetrators' intent.
• United States v. Hargrove
  647 F.2d 411· 4th Cir.· 1981-04-22 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions were affirmed, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on evidence suppression, jury voir dire, newspaper article inquiries, knock-and-announce violations, informant disclosure, or joint trial.
• United States v. Espericueta-Reyes
  631 F.2d 616· 9th Cir.· 1980-10-29 ·cited 28×
  The court held that subsequent searches of a vehicle after an initial border crossing can be considered valid 'extended border searches' if reasonably related in time and distance to the border, and that brief detentions and questioning during such searches do not require Miranda
• United States v. Passaro
  624 F.2d 938· 9th Cir.· 1980-08-04 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the prosecutor's comments on the defendant's failure to present exculpatory evidence were proper, the search of the defendant's wallet incident to arrest was lawful, and any potential Fifth Amendment violation from a single ambiguous prosecutorial comment was
• Hall v. State
  381 So. 2d 683· Fla.· 1979-12-20 ·cited 28×
  The Florida Supreme Court vacated and remanded the death sentences imposed in two first-degree murder convictions, requiring the trial court to provide more detailed written findings of fact regarding aggravating and mitigating circumstances. The court held that conclusory statem
• United States v. Green
  600 F.2d 154· 8th Cir.· 1979-06-11 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the admission of co-conspirator statements, even if not made in furtherance of the conspiracy, was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence, and that other evidentiary and constitutional claims lacked merit.
• United States v. Benfield
  593 F.2d 815· 8th Cir.· 1979-03-08 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation was violated by the procedures used during the videotaped deposition of a key witness, where the defendant was excluded from the witness's vision and unaware of the defendant's presence.
• United States v. Killian
  541 F.2d 1156· 5th Cir.· 1976-11-05 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for willful misapplication of bank funds and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or sentencing.
• United States v. Flores Amaya
  533 F.2d 188· 5th Cir.· 1976-06-09 ·cited 28×
  The court held that admitting prior trial testimony of a witness who lost memory due to an accident was permissible under the Confrontation Clause, and that jury awareness of a prior conviction was not prejudicial.
• Kirby v. Blackledge
  530 F.2d 583· 4th Cir.· 1976-01-19 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment, as genuine issues of material fact existed regarding prisoners' claims of due process violations and cruel and unusual punishment.
• United States v. Armedo-Sarmiento
  524 F.2d 591· 2d Cir.· 1975-10-10 ·cited 28×
  A district court must allow criminal defendants to waive their Sixth Amendment rights to effective assistance of counsel and confrontation, even when counsel has a conflict of interest with potential witnesses, provided the waiver is knowing and intelligent.
• Lebowitz v. State
  313 So. 2d 473· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-05-27 ·cited 28×
  Walter Lebowitz, an attorney, was convicted of receiving stolen property—a purse worth approximately $200 that his client George Foley allegedly stole from Neiman-Marcus. Lebowitz appealed on multiple grounds, including claims that cross-examination violated his Fifth Amendment r
• United States v. Leal
  509 F.2d 122· 9th Cir.· 1975-01-06 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the disputed exhibits were properly admitted.
• United States v. Penick
  496 F.2d 1105· 7th Cir.· 1974-05-08 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in limiting cross-examination of government witnesses, nor in refusing to authorize funds for polygraph examinations for all counts, as such evidence is generally inadmissible.
• United States v. Troutman
  458 F.2d 217· 10th Cir.· 1972-04-03 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the officers had probable cause to arrest the defendant based on the collective knowledge of the police and that the denial of the severance motion was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Satiris G. Fassoulis
  445 F.2d 13· 2d Cir.· 1971-06-18 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict on the conspiracy count and that the submission of unproven overt acts was harmless error. The court also found no constitutional deprivation regarding the identification of the defendant by voice and t
• United States v. Mancuso
  423 F.2d 23· 5th Cir.· 1970-02-17 ·cited 28×
• United States v. Cossie Burruss, Jr.
  418 F.2d 677· 4th Cir.· 1969-11-25 ·cited 28×
  The court held that police 'theft reports' containing hearsay are inadmissible under the Federal Business Records Act to prove the truth of the matter asserted, especially in a criminal case where it violates the defendant's confrontation rights.
• Osborne v. United States
  371 F.2d 913· 9th Cir.· 1967-01-18 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to require disclosure of a trial witness's grand jury testimony for use in cross-examination.
• Edwards v. ST. Louis-San Francisco R.R. Co.
  361 F.2d 946· 7th Cir.· 1966-05-13 ·cited 28×·via Right To Confront Accusers
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the action against the railroad for lack of jurisdiction and service, and correctly refused to review the National Railroad Adjustment Board's award.
• Cordova v. United States
  303 F.2d 454· 10th Cir.· 1962-05-17 ·cited 28×
  The court held that an indictment is not duplicitous if it pleads statutory offenses conjunctively in one count, and that the failure to endorse government witnesses or the presumption of guilt in the statute are not grounds for reversal.
• Christoffel v. United States
  200 F.2d 734· D.C. Cir.· 1952-09-18 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its rulings on evidence, cross-examination, or the admission of prior testimony, and therefore affirmed the conviction.
• State v. McRae
  49 Fla. 389· Fla.· 1905-01-01 ·cited 28×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that disbarment proceedings against attorneys are civil, not criminal, in nature, and therefore depositions of absent witnesses taken on commission and written interrogatories are admissible evidence. The Court granted a mandamus petition compelling