Scienter Element

11 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Schmitt v. State
  590 So. 2d 404· Fla.· 1991-11-14 ·cited 229×
  Kenneth Schmitt challenges his conviction for sexual performance by a child under Florida Statute § 827.071(5), arguing the statute is unconstitutionally overbroad and violates due process. The Florida Supreme Court upholds the conviction and the statute's constitutionality after
• Garcia v. State
  901 So. 2d 788· Fla.· 2005-04-21 ·cited 38×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that when a defendant argues lack of knowledge of an illegal substance's presence, that defendant necessarily disputes knowledge of the substance's illicit nature, making the guilty knowledge element disputed at trial. Therefore, failure to instruct
• United States v. Pupo
  841 F.2d 1235· 4th Cir.· 1988-03-10 ·cited 22×
  A conviction under an indictment that fails to allege an essential element of the offense, specifically scienter, is invalid if the objection is raised before verdict. Newly discovered evidence that is merely cumulative does not warrant a new trial.
• United States v. Thomas
  531 F.2d 419· 9th Cir.· 1976-02-09 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the jury instruction regarding the scienter element for possession and transfer of an unregistered firearm was prejudicially erroneous.
• United States v. Smith
  489 F.2d 1330· 7th Cir.· 1973-11-30 ·cited 18×
  The court held that knowledge of government ownership is not a required element under 18 U.S.C. § 641 for stealing or converting government property.
• Olhausen v. Arriva Med., LLC
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-02-11 ·cited 6×
  This is a False Claims Act qui tam case where the district court vacates its prior dismissal of two counts based on the Eleventh Circuit's remand following Supreme Court precedent clarifying the FCA's scienter requirement. The court orders the parties to confer on whether remaini
• Obregon v. State
  601 So. 2d 616· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-06-23 ·cited 6×
  Carlos Luis Obregon appealed his conviction for possession of cocaine and possession of drug paraphernalia. The Florida Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, rejecting arguments concerning suppression motion reconsideration, the vehicle search, sufficiency of ev
• Warner v. United States
  698 F. Supp. 877· S.D. Fla.· 1988-09-26 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the scienter element of 26 U.S.C. § 6701(a)(3) requires the government to prove the plaintiff was directly involved in aiding or assisting in the preparation or presentation of a false or fraudulent document. The court denied the plaintiff's motion for partial
• United States v. Hester
  880 F.2d 799· 4th Cir.· 1989-07-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instruction defining 'knowingly' to include deliberate disregard for the truth with a conscious purpose to avoid learning the truth was a proper interpretation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(6).
• New Castle Cnty. v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co.
  970 F.2d 1267· 3d Cir.· 1992-07-28 ·cited 2×
  The term 'contaminants' in a pollution exclusion clause is plain and unambiguous and does not carry an implied scienter element, meaning coverage is excluded regardless of whether the insured knew the discharged substance was a contaminant.
• Warner v. United States
  700 F. Supp. 532· S.D. Fla.· 1988-11-04 ·cited 2×
  The Defendant must prove its case by clear and convincing evidence, but the admissibility of evidence is governed by the Federal Rules of Evidence.