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. Kindig
  854 F.2d 703· 5th Cir.· 1988-08-26 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for federal banking law violations, and that the defendants' Sixth Amendment rights were not violated by restrictions on cross-examination.
• United States v. Holland
  850 F.2d 1048· 5th Cir.· 1988-07-25 ·cited 3×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the record was insufficient to support the probation revocation because it did not demonstrate that the defendant was afforded his minimum due process rights, including the opportunity to be heard and present evidence.
• United States v. Betty J. Johnson (86-1993)
  831 F.2d 124· 6th Cir.· 1987-10-15 ·cited 3×
  The court held that a non-practitioner selling bogus prescriptions for controlled substances can be convicted of unlawful distribution, and that sufficient evidence supported the conspiracy convictions of all defendants.
• United States v. Villano
  797 F.2d 1547· 10th Cir.· 1986-08-05 ·cited 3×
  The court held that when an oral sentence conflicts with a written judgment, the court must discern the sentencing judge's intent rather than automatically applying the oral sentence.
• McALLISTER v. Brown
  555 F.2d 1277· 5th Cir.· 1977-07-15 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the state was not required to disclose the informant's identity and that the admission of police testimony regarding the informant's statement was not the use of an involuntary confession.
• Alford v. State
  413 So. 3d 132· Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-04-02 ·cited 2×
  The trial court properly admitted Farris's jailhouse phone call because it did not directly implicate Alford and was not a testimonial statement under the Confrontation Clause, thus not violating Bruton v. United States. Sufficient circumstantial evidence supported Alford's convi
• J.T.B. v. State
  345 So. 3d 927· Fla. 3d DCA· 2022-06-29 ·cited 2×
  This case addresses whether juvenile delinquency hearings conducted remotely via videoconferencing violate a juvenile's due process right to confrontation. The court held that such remote proceedings require case-specific findings of necessity to justify denying in-person confron
• Fla. Int'l Univ. v. Ramos
  335 So. 3d 1221· Fla. 3d DCA· 2021-10-20 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  Florida International University sought certiorari review after a circuit court quashed a student disciplinary decision finding academic misconduct. The court held that the student, Samantha Ramos, was denied due process when prohibited from questioning a witness about bias and m
• Anderson v. State
  46 Fla. L. Weekly S157· Fla. 2d DCA· 2021-07-30 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  The appellate court reversed a felony driving while license suspended or revoked (DWLSR) conviction because the state failed to prove prior convictions with sufficient evidence. The court found that trial counsel's failure to object to this deficiency constituted ineffective assi
• Am. Towing of Miami, LLC v. Leonel Espinal
  45 Fla. L. Weekly D2073· Fla. 3d DCA· 2021-02-10 ·cited 2×
  American Towing of Miami appealed from an order granting class certification in a case alleging violations of Florida Statute § 715.07(2)(a)(9), which prohibits towing companies from requiring liability releases as a condition of vehicle release. The court reversed the class cert
• Arroyo v. State
  252 So. 3d 374· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-08-01 ·cited 2×
  The trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence of the victim's prior consensual sexual activity under the Rape Shield Statute, excluding marginally relevant text messages, or denying the motion for judgment of acquittal, as substantial evidence supported that
• Gomez v. State
  245 So. 3d 950· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-04-25 ·cited 2×
  Although prior allegations of sexual assault do not fall under Florida's rape shield statute, evidence of a victim's prior allegations against the defendant and against a third party were properly excluded as irrelevant because they lacked sufficient similarity to the charged con
• S.D. v. Dep't OF Child. & Families
  208 So. 3d 320· Fla. 3d DCA· 2017-01-04 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the father waived his right to object to his adult daughter's testimony via Skype, and the confrontation right is not implicated in civil dependency proceedings.
• Granados v. State
  199 So. 3d 384· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-08-17 ·cited 2×
  Rolando Granados was convicted of sexually abusing his daughter over several years. On appeal, he challenged admission of the child's out-of-court hearsay statements, sufficiency of evidence on two counts, and the prosecutor's cross-examination questioning why his daughter would
• Banegas-Membran v. State
  182 So. 3d 865· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-01-06 ·cited 2×
  Raul Banegas-Membran was convicted of witness tampering under Florida Statute § 914.22(1) for sending a letter to his ex-girlfriend (mother of alleged victim) asking her not to testify against him in sexual abuse charges. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed his convictio
• Johnson v. State
  117 So. 3d 1238· Fla. 3d DCA· 2013-07-10 ·cited 2×
  Johnson appeals convictions for sexual battery with a deadly weapon, kidnapping, and lewd and lascivious molestation of a child, challenging the admission of DNA evidence and a rape treatment report when the examining physician did not testify. The court upheld the admission of t
• Caldwell v. State
  125 So. 3d 1018· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-07-03 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  Rebecca Ann Caldwell appealed her convictions for three counts of grand theft and one count of making a false entry into corporate books. The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed her convictions, finding no abuse of discretion in the trial judge's exclusion of defense
• Bishullang Shen v. Parkes
  100 So. 3d 1189· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-10-31 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court erred in relying on written reports of an examining committee as evidence in a contested incapacity hearing over a hearsay objection, as the rules of evidence apply and the committee members did not testify.
• Martin v. State
  85 So. 3d 537· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-04-11 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  Derek Martin was convicted of first-degree felony murder, but the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed because the trial court erroneously admitted redacted portions of Martin's police interrogation in which a detective implied that co-defendants and other witnesses h
• Wyon Dale Childers v. Floyd
  608 F.3d 776· 11th Cir.· 2010-06-08 ·cited 2×
  Wyon Dale Childers was convicted of bribery and unlawful compensation based primarily on testimony from Willie Junior, a co-conspirator who received a favorable plea agreement in exchange for cooperation. The trial court prohibited Childers from cross-examining Junior about the E
• Cobb v. State
  16 So. 3d 207· Fla. 5th DCA· 2009-08-07 ·cited 2×
  Terrance Cobb was convicted of first-degree murder and theft in connection with an armed robbery. On appeal, Cobb challenged the admission of the victim's dying declarations to police officers, arguing they violated his Sixth Amendment right of confrontation under Crawford v. Was
• Johnson v. State
  1 So. 3d 1164· Fla. 1st DCA· 2009-01-28 ·cited 2×
  Johnson was convicted of sexual battery and lewd and lascivious molestation of his young son and daughter based primarily on out-of-court hearsay statements that the children recanted at trial. The appellate court reversed the convictions on those charges, finding insufficient ev
• Kendrick Demonte Edwards v. State
  967 So. 2d 308· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-09-26 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  Edwards was convicted of armed robbery based primarily on evidence that a non-testifying witness (Eulaine) had identified him as the person seen at a flea market the day after the robbery. The court reversed because police officers were improperly allowed to testify about Eulaine
• Godwin v. Johnson
  957 So. 2d 39· Fla. 1st DCA· 2007-04-26 ·cited 2×
  Terry Wayne and Matthew Wayne Godwin petitioned for habeas corpus relief challenging the circuit court's denial of pretrial release in a second-degree murder case. The court rejected their Crawford v. Washington arguments contending that the confrontation clause applies to pretri
• Felton v. State
  949 So. 2d 342· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-02-28 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court improperly restricted the defendant's cross-examination of the victim regarding her methadone use at the time of the incident, requiring a new trial.
• State v. Hamner
  942 So. 2d 433· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-10-25 ·cited 2×
  John Dean Hamner was convicted by jury of sexual battery without physical force. The trial court imposed a downward departure sentence of 30 months in the Department of Corrections. On appeal, the State challenged the downward departure sentence, while Hamner cross-appealed on ev
• Randall v. State
  938 So. 2d 542· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-08-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant waived several arguments on appeal by failing to preserve them at trial, and any potential errors were harmless due to overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• State v. Pinault
  933 So. 2d 1287· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-08-02 ·cited 2×
  The trial court's order denying admission of child hearsay evidence is quashed because the Confrontation Clause does not bar admission of a statement when the declarant testifies at trial and is available for cross-examination.
• Smith v. State
  762 So. 2d 969· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-05-31 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  Smith sought post-conviction relief claiming ineffective assistance of appellate counsel for failing to argue the correct harmless error standard under Chapman-DiGuilio-Goodwin analysis. The Fourth District agreed that appellate counsel's failure to challenge the lower court's im
• United States v. Sterba
  22 F. Supp. 2d 1333· M.D. Fla.· 1998-08-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that prosecutorial misconduct intended to provoke a mistrial can bar retrial under the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• Conner v. State
  709 So. 2d 170· Fla. 2d DCA· 1998-03-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the elderly person hearsay exception statute is constitutional, but certain probation conditions imposed without oral pronouncement are invalid.
• Robinson v. City of Tampa
  120 F. Supp. 730· M.D. Fla.· 1997-11-17 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that Younger abstention applies, requiring the federal court to abstain from exercising jurisdiction over the case due to an ongoing state judicial proceeding involving important state interests.
• Young v. State
  624 So. 2d 794· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-09-24 ·cited 2×
  James Young appeals his conviction for capital sexual battery of two young girls, arguing that videotaped testimony of child victims should not have been taken to the jury room without supervision. The appellate court affirms the conviction but certifies a question of great publi
• Stoner v. Sowders
  997 F.2d 209· 6th Cir.· 1993-07-06 ·cited 2×
  The admission of videotaped depositions of witnesses without a sufficient showing of their unavailability violated the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• Woolsey v. Nat'l Transp. Safety Bd. & Fed. Aviation Admin.
  993 F.2d 516· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-23 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the NTSB correctly determined that Prestige Touring, Inc. operated as a common carrier, thus subjecting Roger E. Woolsey to the stricter safety regulations of FAR Part 135.
• United States v. Innamorati
  996 F.2d 456· 1st Cir.· 1993-06-17 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed most convictions but reversed one possession conviction due to insufficient evidence, remanding for resentencing. The court also addressed the admissibility of grand jury testimony.
• United States v. Seavoy
  995 F.2d 1414· 7th Cir.· 1993-06-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of a co-defendant's prior sworn testimony under the residual hearsay exception was proper, and that the denial of a motion to withdraw a guilty plea and a sentence enhancement for firearm use were not erroneous.
• United States v. Sallins
  993 F.2d 344· 3d Cir.· 1993-05-18 ·cited 2×·via Sixth Amendment Right To Confront Witnesses
  The court held that the contents of a police radio dispatch and a 911 computer record, offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted, constituted inadmissible hearsay and their admission was not harmless error.
• United States v. Hernandez
  995 F.2d 307· 1st Cir.· 1993-05-12 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that jury instructions were adequate, evidence supported convictions for conspiracy, possession, and firearm offenses, and entrapment defense was not warranted.
• Lowery v. Collins
  988 F.2d 1364· 5th Cir.· 1993-04-07 ·cited 2×
  The admission of a videotaped interview of a child complainant, without the child testifying in court and being subject to cross-examination, violates the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause, and such an error is not harmless when the videotape likely contributed to the convic
• United States v. Jeromey Clay Parker
  989 F.2d 948· 8th Cir.· 1993-03-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a preliminary hearing is part of a criminal proceeding and does not bar subsequent prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 5032, and that the victim sustained serious bodily injury supporting an offense level increase.
• United States v. Foster
  986 F.2d 541· D.C. Cir.· 1993-03-02 ·cited 2×
  A law enforcement officer testifying as an eyewitness may not refuse to answer questions about the location from which observations were made if that information is relevant and helpful to the defense, and the district court erred in sustaining relevancy objections to defense que
• United States v. Bounds
  985 F.2d 188· 5th Cir.· 1993-02-18 ·cited 2×
• United States v. Cecil Gibson (90-6403) & Johnny Ray Baker (90-6431)
  985 F.2d 860· 6th Cir.· 1993-02-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that aggregating drug quantities from dismissed counts is permissible if supported by a preponderance of the evidence, and that confrontation rights do not apply at sentencing hearings.
• United States v. Martin
  984 F.2d 308· 9th Cir.· 1993-01-21 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that admitting laboratory urinalysis reports without allowing independent retesting violated the defendant's due process right to confrontation at a supervised release revocation hearing.
• United States v. Jones
  982 F.2d 380· 9th Cir.· 1992-12-24 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a blanket prohibition on recross examination, when new matters are elicited on redirect, violates the Confrontation Clause and is not harmless error if the testimony likely contributed to conviction. The court also found the sentencing judge lacked sufficient
• United States v. Pedroli
  979 F.2d 116· 8th Cir.· 1992-10-29 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that a district court may consider hearsay in a Presentence Report during sentencing, and that the calculation of the defendant's criminal history category was proper.
• Forbes v. Trigg
  976 F.2d 308· 7th Cir.· 1992-09-15 ·cited 2×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the Indiana Department of Corrections' rule allowing officials to refuse to appear as witnesses in disciplinary hearings violates due process, but affirmed the denial of the habeas corpus petition on other grounds.
• United States v. Abdul Aziz Ahmad
  974 F.2d 1163· 9th Cir.· 1992-09-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 23(b) is constitutional and that the defendant invited any error in excusing a juror without his presence.
• United States v. Mason
  974 F.2d 897· 7th Cir.· 1992-09-09 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a defendant convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm can have his sentence enhanced based on the underlying conduct of another offense, even if not convicted of that offense, and that procedural claims regarding sentencing were waived or lacked me