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

• Rodwell v. Fair
  834 F.2d 240· 1st Cir.· 1987-12-03 ·via Sixth Amendment Right To Confront Witnesses
  The court held that the appellant's Sixth Amendment claims are barred by adequate and independent state grounds due to procedural default.
• Cuellar v. Tex. Emp. Comm'n & Larco Leasing, Inc.
  825 F.2d 930· 5th Cir.· 1987-08-31 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the complaint, as the plaintiff may have alleged sufficient facts to ground a constitutional claim for deprivation of due process.
• Mann v. Dugger
  817 F.2d 1471· 11th Cir.· 1987-05-14
  The court held that the jury was not misled regarding its advisory role in sentencing and that certain claims regarding a prior conviction were procedurally barred.
• Wernert v. ARN
  819 F.2d 613· 6th Cir.· 1987-04-09 ·via Sixth Amendment Right To Confront Witnesses
  The dissenting judge believes the appellant adequately invoked her right to counsel, disagreeing with the majority's conclusion.
• Brazell Haynes v. State
  502 So. 2d 507· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-02-16 ·via Right To Confrontation
  Brazell Haynes appeals his cocaine possession conviction, challenging the admission of a police officer's testimony about statements made by a confidential informant. The court agreed that the informant's statements constituted inadmissible hearsay and that their admission was no
• Anderson v. United States
  802 F.2d 1056· 8th Cir.· 1986-10-08
  The court held that a witness's assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination regarding a collateral matter does not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation.
• Owens v. Foltz
  797 F.2d 294· 6th Cir.· 1986-07-30 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the identification procedures used were not impermissibly suggestive and did not violate due process, and other claims of error did not rise to constitutional harm.
• Johnson v. State
  490 So. 2d 1365· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-07-10 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying post-conviction relief without allowing the appellant to meaningfully participate in the hearing.
• Nelson v. Thieret
  793 F.2d 146· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-10
  The court held that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation was not violated by the trial court's limitation on cross-examination, and that convictions for both rape and aggravated kidnapping were permissible under Illinois law.
• Renzi v. Warden, U.S. Penitentiary, Terre Haute, IND., & Attorney Gen., State of Conn.
  792 F.2d 311· 2d Cir.· 1986-06-09 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the petitioner's guilty plea to second-degree murder was valid, despite claims of inadequate advisement of rights and factual basis.
• Fuller v. State
  485 So. 2d 35· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-03-19 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court erred in conducting an in camera hearing without the defendant's presence and in issuing a protective order without sufficient predicate.
• United States ex rel. Frank Carlos Colon v. DeROBERTIS
  774 F.2d 801· 7th Cir.· 1985-10-04
  The admission of a codefendant's statement, which differed critically from the defendant's own confession on key facts, was not harmless error under the Confrontation Clause.
• Lavon Morris and Mary Kirkland v. Sch. Bd. OF Broward Cnty.
  477 So. 2d 643· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-10-02 ·via Right To Confrontation
• United States v. Simmons
  773 F.2d 1455· 4th Cir.· 1985-09-30
  The admission of ATF forms and Agent Parker's testimony as hearsay under Fed.R.Evid. 803(24) was improper because trustworthiness and the unavailability of more probative evidence were not established.
• Milo A. Rose v. State
  472 So. 2d 1155· Fla.· 1985-05-16 ·via Right To Confrontation
  Milo Rose was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for beating Robert Richardson with a concrete block multiple times in front of witnesses. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence, rejecting Rose's challenges to the pretrial identi
• Creekmore v. Dist. Court OF the Eighth Jud. Dist. OF the State OF Mont.
  745 F.2d 1236· 9th Cir.· 1984-10-23
  The court held that the defendant was not denied his confrontation right when a witness had a memory lapse on cross-examination regarding a specific statement, as the witness testified fully on direct and was extensively cross-examined.
• Hines v. State
  444 So. 2d 1178· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-02-15 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court erred by summarily denying the defendant's motion for post-conviction relief without conducting an evidentiary hearing or attaching record portions refuting the allegations.
• Cullinane v. Sec'y OF the Dep't OF Health & Human Servs. OF the United States
  728 F.2d 137· 2d Cir.· 1984-02-15 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that an Administrative Law Judge has an affirmative duty to ensure pro se claimants receive full and fair hearings, including the right to confront potentially biased witnesses.
• Oviatt v. State
  440 So. 2d 646· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-11-17
  Kathy Ruth Oviatt was convicted of attempted first-degree murder of her eight-year-old daughter. On appeal, she challenged a pretrial order in limine that prohibited defense counsel from telling the child witness before trial that her mother might go to jail as a result of her te
• United States ex rel. Clifford Knights v. Wolff
  713 F.2d 240· 7th Cir.· 1983-07-08
  A habeas corpus petitioner is barred from raising constitutional claims in federal court if they were procedurally defaulted in state court, absent a showing of cause and actual prejudice.
• United States v. Carroll
  710 F.2d 164· 4th Cir.· 1983-06-22
  The court held that the defendant's statements were voluntary, the tracking dog evidence was admissible, and the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• Pena v. State
  432 So. 2d 715· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-06-07 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to require the state to disclose the confidential informant's whereabouts after the informant's identity was revealed, and that the use of an edited transcript of a recorded conversation was permissible under certain condition
• United States v. Troupe
  702 F.2d 145· 8th Cir.· 1983-03-15 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the admission of evidence of prior arrests was proper and any error regarding a witness's prior felony conviction was harmless. The limitation on cross-examination did not violate the defendant's confrontation rights.
• Baliza v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  709 F.2d 1231· 9th Cir.· 1983-01-18 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The government's introduction of an unauthenticated hearsay affidavit, without sufficient effort to produce the affiant for cross-examination, deprived the alien of his statutory right to confront witnesses.
• Steele v. Taylor
  697 F.2d 128· 6th Cir.· 1982-12-30
• United States v. Peeper
  685 F.2d 328· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-25
  The court held that the defendant waived his Sixth Amendment confrontation clause argument by failing to object to the admission of taped recordings, as his attorney made a tactical decision to allow their introduction.
• James v. Louie L. Wainwright
  680 F.2d 102· 11th Cir.· 1982-07-06
  The use of a deceased eyewitness's preliminary hearing testimony transcript at trial was constitutionally permissible.
• Freeman Leroy Bell v. Harrison
  670 F.2d 656· 6th Cir.· 1982-02-09
  The court held that Tennessee's rape shield statute, T.C.A. § 40-2445, is constitutional on its face and as applied, and did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation.
• D. D. v. Honorable Bill White
  650 F.2d 749· 5th Cir.· 1981-07-16 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that a federal district court must dismiss a mixed petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which contains both exhausted and unexhausted claims, without prejudice due to the petitioner's failure to exhaust available state remedies.
• United States v. Greer
  643 F.2d 280· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-20
  The court held that a trial judge's cautionary remarks to counsel about professional responsibility, even to an inexperienced attorney, do not impermissibly limit the right to cross-examination if cross-examination is otherwise permitted. The court also held that limiting questio
• Cappella v. The United States
  624 F.2d 976· Ct. Cl.· 1980-05-28
  The court held that an Article 15 proceeding is an administrative method for minor offenses, and the commanding officer has discretion to determine if an offense is minor enough for such proceedings, even if it could be tried by court-martial.
• Kufrin v. State
  378 So. 2d 1341· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-01-22 ·via Right To Confrontation
  Paul Kufrin was convicted of LSD sale based on testimony from undercover narcotics agent Charles Hitchens. The Florida appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial because the trial judge improperly restricted cross-examination that would have exposed Hitchens' bias and
• Carmelo Canet v. Turner
  606 F.2d 89· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-07
  The court held that a claim regarding an illegal sentence, based on a recent Florida Supreme Court ruling, was not exhausted and must be remanded for state court consideration. Other claims were affirmed.
• Stipp v. State
  371 So. 2d 712· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-06-06 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the state's unnecessary destruction of critical evidence, preventing the defendant from testing it, violates due process and requires reversal of the conviction.
• Hughes v. State
  356 So. 2d 27· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-02-21
  Rickey Hughes was convicted of robbery and unlawful possession of a firearm. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed his conviction because the trial court improperly restricted cross-examination of the state's key witness regarding the witness's reluctance to testify, viol
• Johnson v. State
  355 So. 2d 143· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-02-07 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The appellate court affirmed the defendant's convictions for murder, robbery, kidnapping, and unlawful firearm possession, holding that the trial court did not err in denying motions for severance or admitting photographs.
• Meeks v. Jago
  548 F.2d 134· 6th Cir.· 1976-12-30
  The Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus, finding that the appellant had not exhausted state remedies for most claims and that the remaining claims did not present substantial constitutional questions.
• Dorsey v. Warden, S. Mich. State Prison
  523 F.2d 590· 6th Cir.· 1975-10-17
  The Sixth Circuit held that the petitioner's confrontation clause rights were not violated, but remanded for an evidentiary hearing on due process claims regarding an impartial judge and suppression of evidence.
• Morse v. Wilson
  500 F.2d 1264· 10th Cir.· 1974-07-29
  The court held that the admission of depositions did not violate the Sixth Amendment confrontation clause, as the right was waived, and that adequate Miranda warnings were provided, thus affirming the denial of the habeas corpus petition.
• Williams v. United States
  488 F.2d 963· 5th Cir.· 1974-01-23 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the district court erred in summarily denying the appellant's second motion to vacate judgment and sentence, as the issues raised had not been previously heard.
• United States v. Sawyer
  483 F.2d 663· 5th Cir.· 1973-08-30 ·via Confrontation Of Witnesses
  The court held that the defendant's contentions regarding sentencing discrimination, cruel and unusual punishment, and denial of due process were without merit.
• FOY v. Bounds
  481 F.2d 286· 4th Cir.· 1973-06-20 ·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the prisoner's probation revocation hearing, though lacking formal confrontation, did not violate due process standards as applied retroactively, given the circumstances and lack of objection.
• Hall v. State
  273 So. 2d 90· Fla. 4th DCA· 1973-02-08 ·via Right To Confrontation
  Charles Hall appealed the denial of his motion to vacate a judgment based on his nolo contendere plea. The court affirmed, holding that under Boykin v. Alabama, a guilty plea need only be shown in the record to be voluntary, knowing, and understanding—without requiring explicit e
• Blackwell v. State
  269 So. 2d 737· Fla. 1st DCA· 1972-12-05
  The court held that admitting a codefendant's confession is permissible when there is ample independent corroborative evidence of the defendant's guilt, distinguishing the case from Bruton v. United States.
• United States v. Everett
  457 F.2d 813· 9th Cir.· 1972-03-22
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in failing to sua sponte order a hearing on the voluntariness of admissions, nor was there a violation of the defendant's confrontation rights.
• United States v. Wheeler
  449 F.2d 785· 8th Cir.· 1971-10-15
  The appellate court held that the admission of a co-defendant's extra-judicial confession, though a violation of the Bruton rule, constituted harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Kienlen v. United States
  437 F.2d 843· 10th Cir.· 1971-01-12
  The court held that the admission of extrajudicial statements from hospital records and a letter, without proper jury instructions, created a substantial risk that the jury considered them as evidence, violating the defendant's right to confrontation.
• Fowler v. Louie L. Wainwright
  436 F.2d 387· 5th Cir.· 1971-01-08 ·via Right To Confrontation
• Carthel James Rushing v. State
  241 So. 2d 873· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-12-22 ·via Right To Confrontation
• White v. State
  244 So. 2d 499· Fla. 1st DCA· 1970-12-22 ·via Right To Confrontation
  Leon White appeals the trial court's denial of his motion to withdraw a guilty plea to charges of attempting to unlawfully obtain a controlled substance and resisting arrest with violence. The court affirmed the denial, finding that the trial judge conducted an exhaustive and tho