Sixth Amendment (Confrontation Clause)

1,582 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 857 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Richardson v. State
  246 So. 2d 771· Fla.· 1971-03-31 ·cited 1704×·via Right To Confrontation
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed Richardson's arson conviction due to two prosecutorial errors: the State's failure to timely disclose a key witness's name (Dick Davis) in violation of discovery rules, and the State's prejudicial use of an accomplice witness (Grooms) who invoke
• Ramirez v. State
  739 So. 2d 568· Fla.· 1999-07-08 ·cited 402×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed Nathan Ramirez's death sentence for the first-degree murder of Mildred Boroski, finding that his confession was obtained in violation of Miranda rights and that improper hearsay evidence regarding his codefendant's confession was admitted at tri
• Thompson v. State
  759 So. 2d 650· Fla.· 2000-04-13 ·cited 347×·via Right To Confrontation
  William L. Thompson, a death row inmate, appealed the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion and petitioned for habeas corpus relief. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's summary denial of the motion and rejected all claims, finding most were procedurally
• Fredford James Eutsey v. State
  383 So. 2d 219· Fla.· 1980-04-24 ·cited 336×·via Right To Confrontation
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Florida's habitual offender statute (section 775.084) against a due process challenge, holding that enhanced sentencing proceedings need not provide all the procedural safeguards of criminal trials for determining guilt. T
• McDUFFIE v. State
  970 So. 2d 312· Fla.· 2007-11-21 ·cited 277×
  Roy Lee McDuffie was convicted of two first-degree murders, robbery with a firearm, and false imprisonment in connection with the October 2002 deaths of two Dollar General employees. The Florida Supreme Court reversed his convictions and death sentences, finding that multiple tri
• Dusty Ray Spencer v. State
  645 So. 2d 377· Fla.· 1994-09-22 ·cited 266×·via Right To Confrontation
  Dusty Ray Spencer was convicted of first-degree murder in the killing of his wife Karen Spencer and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the murder conviction but vacated the death sentence and remanded for resentencing because the trial court improperly found t
• United States v. Thevis
  665 F.2d 616· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-11 ·cited 261×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in admitting Underhill's grand jury testimony under a hearsay exception and that the conspiracy charge under 18 U.S.C. § 241 was valid.
• United States v. Oates
  560 F.2d 45· 2d Cir.· 1977-06-03 ·cited 256×
  The court held that the chemist's report and worksheet were inadmissible hearsay under the Federal Rules of Evidence, requiring reversal and a new trial.
• United States v. Louin Ray Bright
  630 F.2d 804· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-11 ·cited 230×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the pre-trial rulings, trial rulings, jury charge, or closing arguments.
• United States v. Diecidue
  603 F.2d 535· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-01 ·cited 226×
  A RICO conspiracy indictment adequately alleges an essential element when it charges defendants with willfully and knowingly conspiring to violate 18 U.S.C.A. § 1962(c) and describes the nature of the racketeering activities composing the alleged pattern. The definition of 'enter
• Finney v. State
  660 So. 2d 674· Fla.· 1995-07-20 ·cited 222×·via Right To Confrontation
  Charles Finney appeals his convictions for first-degree murder, armed robbery, and dealing in stolen property, as well as his death sentence, in the stabbing death of Sandra Sutherland. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed all convictions and the death penalty after finding suffici
• Ford v. Strickland
  696 F.2d 804· 11th Cir.· 1983-01-07 ·cited 214×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the Florida Supreme Court's practice of considering non-record material on direct appeal in capital cases violates due process, and that failure to require full resentencing after invalidating aggravating factors is an error.
• United States v. Bozza
  365 F.2d 206· 2d Cir.· 1966-08-01 ·cited 209×
  The majority reverses convictions based on the admission of a co-defendant's confession, finding it prejudiced other defendants despite limiting instructions.
• Hyser v. Reed
  318 F.2d 225· D.C. Cir.· 1963-04-11 ·cited 203×·via Right To Confrontation
  Parolees are entitled to a hearing at a geographically reasonable location but not to appointed counsel, compulsory process, or confrontation in all cases.
• United States v. Silverstein
  732 F.2d 1338· 7th Cir.· 1984-04-26 ·cited 200×·via Right To Confrontation
• United States v. DeLUNA
  763 F.2d 897· 8th Cir.· 1985-05-10 ·cited 199×
  The court held that the magistrate was not required to disqualify, the search warrant was sufficiently specific, and co-conspirator statements were admissible and did not violate confrontation rights.
• Ruiz v. State
  743 So. 2d 1· Fla.· 1999-04-01 ·cited 193×·via Right To Confrontation
  Walter Ruiz was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for a murder-for-hire killing. The Florida Supreme Court reversed his conviction and vacated his sentence due to egregious prosecutorial misconduct during both guilt and penalty phases of trial, including imp
• United States v. Berkowitz
  662 F.2d 1127· 5th Cir.· 1981-12-07 ·cited 189×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for severance, limiting cross-examination, or in its handling of other issues raised by the defendants.
• United States v. Kahn
  381 F.2d 824· 7th Cir.· 1967-06-29 ·cited 185×·via Sixth Amendment Right To Confront Witnesses
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the credibility and lying witness instructions were not erroneous, the denial of a mistrial upon a co-defendant's guilty plea was not an abuse of discretion, and the denial of severance was proper.
• United States v. Lewis
  759 F.2d 1316· 8th Cir.· 1985-03-22 ·cited 178×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to follow Rule 65 procedural safeguards when issuing a temporary restraining order freezing assets, which implicated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel. However, the defendant could not raise this issue on appe
• United States v. Onori
  535 F.2d 938· 5th Cir.· 1976-07-26 ·cited 175×
  The court held that the trial court's actions regarding judicial comments, admission of 'other crimes' evidence, limitations on cross-examination, and use of transcripts did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Carlson
  547 F.2d 1346· 8th Cir.· 1976-12-17 ·cited 172×
  The court held that the admission of grand jury testimony under Fed.R.Ev. 804(b)(5) was proper because the declarant was unavailable due to the defendant's actions, and the defendant waived his confrontation rights by causing the unavailability. The court also found the testimony
• Roberts v. State
  568 So. 2d 1255· Fla.· 1990-09-06 ·cited 171×·via Right To Confrontation
  Rickey Bernard Roberts, a death row inmate convicted of first-degree murder, armed sexual battery, and armed kidnapping, sought postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and a writ of habeas corpus challenging his conviction and death sentence. The Flor
• United States v. Fleishman
  684 F.2d 1329· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-26 ·cited 164×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in admitting agent opinion testimony regarding lookout activity, handwriting expert testimony, or coconspirator hearsay statements, and that sufficient evidence supported the conspiracy conviction.
• United States v. Hartley
  678 F.2d 961· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-17 ·cited 163×
  The court held that a corporation can conspire with its own officers, agents, and employees, and that sufficient evidence existed to support the convictions for conspiracy, mail fraud, and RICO violations.
• Tompkins v. State
  502 So. 2d 415· Fla.· 1986-12-30 ·cited 159×
  Wayne Tompkins was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for strangling 15-year-old Lisa DeCarr in 1983. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed both the conviction and death sentence, rejecting challenges to the admission of Tompkins' confession, cross-examination l
• Will Blackwell and Robert Blackwell v. The State of Floirda
  79 Fla. 709· Fla.· 1920-05-10 ·cited 158×·via Right To Confrontation
  Will and Robert Blackwell were convicted of murder in the first degree and sentenced to death. On appeal, the Florida Supreme Court rejected numerous assignments of error regarding jury composition, jury instructions, admission of prior trial testimony, and defense counsel repres
• United States v. Baxter
  492 F.2d 150· 9th Cir.· 1973-02-16 ·cited 156×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish the existence of an over-all narcotics conspiracy and the participation of each of the eight defendants, and that the trial court did not err in denying their motions for severance.
• Postell v. State
  398 So. 2d 851· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-04-28 ·cited 155×
  Larry Postell was convicted of armed robbery based largely on eyewitness identification, but the trial court admitted highly prejudicial hearsay testimony about an unidentified woman's statements to police officers implicating Postell, without allowing cross-examination. The appe
• United States v. Somers
  496 F.2d 723· 3d Cir.· 1974-03-27 ·cited 154×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the district court did not commit reversible error in denying severance motions, refusing to recall a witness, refusing to compel a witness to testify, or due to prosecutorial misconduct.
• United States v. Cardillo
  316 F.2d 606· 2d Cir.· 1963-04-24 ·cited 154×
  The court held that the trial court erred in not striking Friedman's testimony against Harris and Kaminsky because his assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege prevented cross-examination on matters directly related to the charges, thus violating their Sixth Amendment right to
• Quawn M. Franklin v. State
  965 So. 2d 79· Fla.· 2007-06-21 ·cited 147×
  Quawn Franklin was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the shooting death of Jerry Lawley during an attempted robbery. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence, rejecting Franklin's challenges regarding confrontation clause viol
• Johnson v. Louie L. Wainwright
  463 So. 2d 207· Fla.· 1985-01-28 ·cited 144×·via Right To Confrontation
  Larry Joe Johnson, a death row inmate, challenged his conviction and death sentence through habeas corpus and a Rule 3.850 motion, arguing his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise certain trial errors. The Florida Supreme Court rejected his ineffectiveness claim
• Posey v. United States
  416 F.2d 545· 5th Cir.· 1969-07-17 ·cited 144×
• United States v. Winter
  663 F.2d 1120· 1st Cir.· 1981-10-30 ·cited 142×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the Government's use of a non-statutory immunity agreement with a key witness was permissible and did not violate defendants' rights, and that the jury's decision to credit the witness's testimony was within their prerogative.
• United States v. Scholle
  553 F.2d 1109· 8th Cir.· 1977-04-12 ·cited 142×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the admission of co-conspirator statements was proper because substantial independent evidence showed a likelihood of illicit association, and that the admission of prior consistent statements and evidence of prior bad acts was permissible under the Federal Ru
• Coco v. State
  62 So. 2d 892· Fla.· 1953-01-20 ·cited 141×·via Right To Confrontation
  Eddie Coco was convicted of second-degree murder in the death of Johnnie Smith, based partly on eyewitness testimony and fingerprint evidence. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction, holding that the trial court committed reversible error by denying defense counsel the
• Rhodes v. State
  547 So. 2d 1201· Fla.· 1989-07-06 ·cited 138×·via Right To Confrontation
  Richard Wallace Rhodes was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the 1984 strangulation of Karen Nieradka in Florida. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but remanded for a new sentencing hearing due to multiple errors in the penalty phase, inc
• Foster v. State
  614 So. 2d 455· Fla.· 1992-10-22 ·cited 136×·via Right To Confrontation
  Charles Kenneth Foster appeals his death sentence imposed after resentencing. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the denial of his postconviction motion for procedural and substantive reasons, but vacated and remanded his death sentence because the trial court's resentencing orde
• United States v. Wilson
  500 F.2d 715· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-18 ·cited 132×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no merit in the appellants' arguments regarding statutory vagueness, severance, admission of evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, or insufficiency of evidence.
• Verdugo v. United States
  402 F.2d 599· 9th Cir.· 1968-05-16 ·cited 132×·via Right To Confrontation
  The dissenting judge held that illegally seized evidence, though inadmissible for determining guilt, may be considered by the sentencing judge. The judge also stated there was no error in not providing the defendant with a copy of the presentence report.
• Rodgers v. State
  948 So. 2d 655· Fla.· 2006-10-26 ·cited 131×
  Theodore Rodgers was convicted of first-degree murder for shooting his wife Teresa Henderson and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and sentence, rejecting challenges to jury selection, hearsay evidence, mental retardation findings, and the cons
• United States v. Gray
  626 F.2d 494· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-26 ·cited 131×
  The court held that the 'slight evidence' jury instruction on conspiracy was reversible error, requiring reversal of those convictions for some defendants, but affirmed other convictions and declined to review certain sufficiency claims under the concurrent sentence doctrine.
• Roberts v. State
  510 So. 2d 885· Fla.· 1987-07-02 ·cited 129×·via Right To Confrontation
  Rickey Bernard Roberts was convicted of first-degree murder, armed sexual battery, and armed kidnapping in the brutal murder of George Ñapóles and assault of Michelle Rimondi on a Florida beach. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and death sentence, rejecting mult
• United States v. Andrus
  775 F.2d 825· 7th Cir.· 1985-10-22 ·cited 129×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting coconspirator statements under Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E) and that the procedures used to determine admissibility did not violate defendants' rights.
• Mills v. State
  476 So. 2d 172· Fla.· 1985-08-30 ·cited 125×
  Gregory Mills was convicted of first-degree murder, burglary, and aggravated battery for shooting James Wright during a home invasion. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the murder and burglary convictions and death sentence, but vacated the aggravated battery conviction as a mer
• Engle v. State
  438 So. 2d 803· Fla.· 1983-09-15 ·cited 124×
  Gregory Scott Engle was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death despite a jury recommendation of life imprisonment. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the conviction but vacated the sentence due to the trial judge's improper consideration of a co-defendant's confess
• United States v. Mayes
  512 F.2d 637· 6th Cir.· 1975-02-25 ·cited 123×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a jury finding of a single conspiracy and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its jury instructions or the handling of peremptory challenges and severance motions.
• United States v. Williams
  737 F.2d 594· 7th Cir.· 1984-06-08 ·cited 122×
  The court held that the electronic surveillance evidence was admissible because the applications and orders satisfied statutory requirements and the Fourth Amendment, and any misrepresentations or omissions in the affidavits were not material to probable cause.
• Calley v. Callaway
  519 F.2d 184· 5th Cir.· 1975-09-10 ·cited 120×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that federal courts have a limited scope of review for court-martial convictions, requiring claims to be of substantial constitutional dimension or fundamental legal error, and that the military courts had fairly considered Calley's claims.