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

• United States v. Mohamed Salim
  855 F.2d 944· 2d Cir.· 1988-08-24 ·cited 27×
  A deposition taken abroad under foreign law, even with procedural differences from U.S. standards, may be admissible in a criminal trial if the defendant had an opportunity for similar cross-examination and the foreign procedures are not so unreliable as to violate fundamental fa
• United States v. Carl E. Banks & Arthester McCruiston
  687 F.2d 967· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-23 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the defendant failed to preserve the issue of the admissibility of prior convictions for appeal by not obtaining a definitive ruling from the trial court. It also held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in conducting the voir dire or denying sev
• United States v. Ocampo
  650 F.2d 421· 2d Cir.· 1981-06-02 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the admission of hearsay testimony identifying a defendant as a known drug trafficker was reversible error, but upheld the convictions of other defendants based on sufficient evidence and proper procedures.
• United States v. Martinez
  616 F.2d 185· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-30 ·cited 27×·via Constitutional Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the defendants' arguments regarding double jeopardy, prosecutorial misconduct, insufficiency of evidence, and the failure to provide an interpreter did not warrant reversal.
• Julian v. Desue, IV
  908 So. 2d 1116· Fla. 1st DCA· 2005-07-25 ·cited 26×·via Right To Confrontation
  Desue challenges his armed robbery conviction and life sentence as a prison releasee reoffender, arguing that using Department of Corrections records to establish his release date violated his Sixth Amendment right to confrontation under Crawford v. Washington. The First District
• Curtis v. State
  876 So. 2d 13· Fla. 1st DCA· 2004-05-18 ·cited 26×·via Right To Confrontation
  Juan Curtis was convicted of first-degree murder and armed robbery in the shooting death of Mary Ann Stephens during a robbery. The court reversed his convictions, holding that the trial court violated his constitutional right to a fair trial by excluding a confession from Brento
• Cumbie v. Singletary
  991 F.2d 715· 11th Cir.· 1993-05-26 ·cited 26×
  Kenneth Cumbie was convicted in 1987 of attempting to sexually assault his five-year-old stepdaughter after she testified via one-way closed circuit television outside his presence. The Eleventh Circuit held that the trial court violated Cumbie's Sixth Amendment right to face-to-
• Long v. State
  610 So. 2d 1276· Fla.· 1992-10-15 ·cited 26×·via Right To Confrontation
  Robert Joe Long appeals his conviction and death sentence for the murder of Virginia Johnson. The Florida Supreme Court reverses and remands for a new trial, finding that the trial court erred in allowing the State to introduce edited portions of a CBS videotaped interview withou
• United States v. Kelly
  892 F.2d 255· 3d Cir.· 1989-12-19 ·cited 26×
  The court held that admitting videotaped depositions of unavailable foreign witnesses, taken with defense counsel present and a phone line for consultation, did not violate the Confrontation Clause. The court also held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction de
• United States v. Petitjean
  883 F.2d 1341· 7th Cir.· 1989-09-05 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the defendant's arguments regarding a duplicitous indictment, insufficient evidence, confrontation clause violations, and sentencing procedures were without merit, affirming his convictions.
• United States v. Lynn
  856 F.2d 430· 1st Cir.· 1988-09-13 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by impermissibly circumscribing cross-examination regarding a witness's polygraph examination and by admitting evidence of the defendant's prior conviction, thereby impairing the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights.
• United States v. Angelos Markopoulos
  848 F.2d 1036· 10th Cir.· 1988-06-02 ·cited 26×·via Sixth Amendment Right To Confront Witnesses
  The court held that while some evidence was improperly admitted and jury instructions were flawed, these errors were harmless and did not warrant reversal of the conspiracy conviction.
• Leatrice Little v. Armontrout
  835 F.2d 1240· 8th Cir.· 1987-12-23 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court's refusal to appoint an expert in hypnosis for an indigent defendant violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process.
• Lacy v. Gardino
  791 F.2d 980· 1st Cir.· 1986-05-27 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition, holding that while a Sixth Amendment violation occurred, it was harmless error because the unmasked information was cumulative and did not contribute to the verdict.
• United States v. Wright
  783 F.2d 1091· D.C. Cir.· 1986-02-18 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the convictions of both defendants, finding no abuse of discretion in denying severance motions and no substantial prejudice from evidentiary rulings.
• United States v. Accetturo
  783 F.2d 382· 3d Cir.· 1986-02-14 ·cited 26×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the Bail Reform Act is not facially unconstitutional for failing to contain a specific time limitation on pretrial detention.
• United States v. Leonicio Fernando Cruz
  765 F.2d 1020· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-15 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the English transcript of Spanish conversations was properly admitted as substantive evidence, and while the admission of hearsay statements was error, it was harmless due to sufficient other evidence.
• United States v. Quezada
  754 F.2d 1190· 5th Cir.· 1985-02-20 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the warrant of deportation, containing the appellant's thumbprint and corroborated by agent testimony regarding INS procedures, sufficiently established the "arrest" requirement for an illegal reentry conviction under 8 U.S.C. § 1326.
• United States v. Bautista
  731 F.2d 97· 1st Cir.· 1984-04-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the search of the vehicle was lawful as incident to a lawful arrest, the denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion, the co-conspirator's statements were properly admitted, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• Tyars v. Finner
  709 F.2d 1274· 9th Cir.· 1983-06-21 ·cited 26×
  The court's holding is not explicitly stated as the opinion is a concurrence.
• United States v. Arnott
  704 F.2d 322· 6th Cir.· 1983-04-08 ·cited 26×·via Sixth Amendment Right To Confront Witnesses
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination scope, admitting co-conspirator statements, or admitting weapons evidence, and that no fundamental rights were affected by the rulings.
• Emmett Eugene Cloud, Jr. v. Thomas
  627 F.2d 742· 5th Cir.· 1980-10-10 ·cited 26×
  The Sixth Amendment does not grant a constitutional right to impeach a witness's general credibility with evidence of prior bad acts not resulting in a conviction.
• United States v. Stephens
  609 F.2d 230· 5th Cir.· 1980-01-07 ·cited 26×
  Counsel in a criminal case may waive a client's Sixth Amendment right of confrontation by stipulating to the admission of evidence, provided the defendant does not dissent and the decision is a legitimate trial tactic.
• Rado v. State OF Conn.
  607 F.2d 572· 2d Cir.· 1979-10-03 ·cited 26×
  The court reversed the district court's judgment, holding that the state's attorney's recitation of a witness's prior statement did not violate the Confrontation Clause and that the questioning of the witness, even with the expectation of a Fifth Amendment invocation, did not con
• United States v. Digeronimo
  598 F.2d 746· 2d Cir.· 1979-05-03 ·cited 26×
  Convictions for receiving and possessing stolen goods are multiplicitous with Hobbs Act robbery convictions when the possession is of the goods stolen in the robbery, and thus must be vacated. Other convictions are affirmed.
• United States v. Beacher Drell Roach
  590 F.2d 181· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-26 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the absence of counsel and a transcript at a preliminary hearing requires a remand to determine prejudice, and vacated a conviction based on Supreme Court precedent regarding multiple punishments for the same offense.
• United States v. Roberts
  583 F.2d 1173· 10th Cir.· 1978-10-11 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the introduction of codefendant's statements did not violate the Sixth Amendment confrontation clause and that a warrantless search of an automobile was reasonable under the circumstances.
• United States v. Hansen
  583 F.2d 325· 7th Cir.· 1978-08-15 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying severance motions or restricting cross-examination, and that most convictions were supported by sufficient evidence. However, the court reversed and remanded the perjury convictions for Steven R. Hansen due to prejudicial
• United States v. Weaver
  565 F.2d 129· 8th Cir.· 1977-10-31 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction for aiding and abetting an armed bank robbery was supported by sufficient evidence and that his constitutional rights were not violated by pre-indictment delay, speedy trial issues, or the admission of other crimes evidence.
• United States ex rel. George Sims v. Allyn Sielaff
  563 F.2d 821· 7th Cir.· 1977-08-31 ·cited 26×·via Right To Confrontation
  A parolee's claim that a delay in their revocation hearing violates due process must be judged by the standards set forth in Barker v. Wingo, not by a presumption of prejudice based solely on the length of the delay.
• United States v. Gonzalez
  555 F.2d 308· 2d Cir.· 1977-05-06 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the informant's tip, corroborated by independent surveillance, provided probable cause for Costano's arrest, and that the admission of Costano's statement against Gonzalez violated Bruton v. United States because it was not harmless error.
• United States v. Cavallaro
  553 F.2d 300· 2d Cir.· 1977-04-19 ·cited 26×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove interstate kidnapping, that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague, that the trial court did not err in limiting questioning about a witness's address, and that evidence of a subsequent crime was admissible.
• United States v. HAY
  527 F.2d 990· 10th Cir.· 1975-12-31 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the appellant was not denied his right to a speedy trial, that the admission of Swiss bank records and deposition testimony was harmless error due to his admissions, and that the evidence established a crime against the United States.
• United States v. Crane
  499 F.2d 1385· 6th Cir.· 1974-07-11 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a tandem trial procedure, where a single jury hears evidence against codefendants first and then hears evidence against the appellant, violates the appellant's constitutional rights to due process and a fair trial.
• United States v. Dunham Concrete Prods., Inc.
  475 F.2d 1241· 5th Cir.· 1973-03-23 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the repealed statute, 15 U.S.C.A. § 32, did not grant immunity for testimony in private antitrust suits, as immunity could only be conferred by the government. The court also found no reversible error in the grand jury proceedings or trial.
• United States v. Sherman
  474 F.2d 303· 9th Cir.· 1973-02-01 ·cited 26×·via Right To Confrontation
  A guilty plea is valid even if the defendant is not explicitly advised of the right against self-incrimination, as long as the record shows the plea was knowing and voluntary.
• United States v. Wilkerson
  469 F.2d 963· 5th Cir.· 1972-12-07 ·cited 26×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the admission of a co-conspirator's statement, even if technically hearsay, was not reversible error when the declarant testified and was cross-examined, and that convictions for possession and transfer of counterfeit currency were permissible for distinct tra
• Birzon v. King
  469 F.2d 1241· 2d Cir.· 1972-12-06 ·cited 26×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that while the parole condition itself was constitutional, the revocation hearing was fundamentally unfair and denied due process by relying solely on an unverified state parole report without allowing confrontation or disclosure of informants.
• United States v. DeCARLO
  458 F.2d 358· 3d Cir.· 1972-04-04 ·cited 26×·via Sixth Amendment Right To Confront Witnesses
  The dissenting judge would reverse the conviction because the trial court erred in admitting evidence of the victim's cause of death and in failing to instruct the jury on its relevance.
• United States v. Robinson
  449 F.2d 925· 9th Cir.· 1971-10-05 ·cited 26×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the appellants received sufficient notice of the contempt charges and that the evidence supported their convictions for violating the preliminary injunction.
• United States v. Trudo
  449 F.2d 649· 2d Cir.· 1971-09-21 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the admission of redacted confessions in a joint trial did not violate the Bruton rule when the confessions, as presented to the jury, did not directly incriminate co-defendants.
• United States v. Anderson
  447 F.2d 833· 8th Cir.· 1971-08-30 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, but the admission of tax assessor testimony regarding property values was inadmissible hearsay and prejudicial for most counts. However, other evidence supported the convictions for Counts II and III.
• State v. R. E. F.
  251 So. 2d 672· Fla. 1st DCA· 1971-08-17 ·cited 26×·via Confrontation Of Witnesses
  The State of Florida appeals a trial court's dismissal of a rape indictment against a 16-year-old juvenile who had previously been adjudicated delinquent in juvenile court for the same offense. The court holds that juvenile delinquency proceedings are civil in nature and do not b
• Walker R. Wade v. United States
  441 F.2d 1046· D.C. Cir.· 1971-01-18 ·cited 26×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court should affirm the convictions because the defendant's absence was voluntary, or alternatively, no prejudice resulted from his absence.
• United States v. Williams
  424 F.2d 344· 5th Cir.· 1970-03-26 ·cited 26×
  The court held that admitting expert testimony based on unintroduced records violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, requiring reversal of one conviction. Other convictions were affirmed.
• Townsend v. Henderson
  405 F.2d 324· 6th Cir.· 1968-12-26 ·cited 26×
  A confession obtained from a prisoner in solitary confinement, under circumstances implying further punishment, is involuntary and inadmissible. The admission of such a confession in a joint trial, even with limiting instructions, violates the co-defendant's Sixth Amendment right
• Beard v. State
  104 So. 2d 680· Fla. 1st DCA· 1958-07-24 ·cited 26×·via Right To Confrontation
  Two defendants were convicted of lewd and lascivious assault on a child. The court affirmed Jernigan's conviction but reversed Beard's conviction, holding that the trial court erred in denying Beard the right to closing argument, and that Beard's cross-examination of his co-defen
• Curtis v. Rives
  123 F.2d 936· D.C. Cir.· 1941-12-01 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the appellant's claims of denial of confrontation and compulsory process rights were not supported by the record, and thus the writ of habeas corpus was properly denied.
• Jenkins v. State
  803 So. 2d 783· Fla. 5th DCA· 2001-11-30 ·cited 25×·via Right To Confrontation
  Jenkins appeals his civil commitment under Florida's Jimmy Ryce Act, challenging the admission of extensive hearsay evidence that denied him due process and his right to confront witnesses. The court reverses, holding that committing Jenkins largely on untested hearsay—including
• Purcell v. State
  735 So. 2d 579· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-06-23 ·cited 25×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial judge erred by refusing to permit defense counsel to impeach a key prosecution witness by showing bias.