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

• Fletcher v. United States
  332 F.2d 724· D.C. Cir.· 1964-04-30 ·cited 42×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the circumstances surrounding a witness's refusal to testify, particularly when the refusal was anticipated and the questions depicted the entire offense, unfairly prejudiced the defendant and affected his substantial rights.
• Hamer v. United States
  259 F.2d 274· 9th Cir.· 1958-08-26 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the trial judge's voir dire was adequate, the use of a jury book by the prosecution did not constitute error per se, and the arrest and search were based on probable cause.
• Matthews v. United States
  217 F.2d 409· 5th Cir.· 1954-12-09 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the admission of the sugar reports, which were required by statute but not made in the regular course of the business for its own purposes, constituted prejudicial error because they were hearsay and did not fall under any recognized exception.
• Damren v. State
  696 So. 2d 709· Fla.· 1997-05-08 ·cited 41×
  Floyd Damren was convicted of first-degree murder, armed burglary, and aggravated assault in the brutal killing of Don Miller during a burglary at a mining facility, and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence, finding no reversibl
• United States v. Paul C. "Paulie" Villano
  816 F.2d 1448· 10th Cir.· 1987-04-21 ·cited 41×
• United States v. Davis
  767 F.2d 1025· 2d Cir.· 1985-05-31 ·cited 41×
  The court held that Swiss bank records were admissible despite a claimed treaty violation because the defendant lacked standing to raise the issue and had ample opportunity to challenge authenticity. The court also held that the district court properly ordered the defendant to ce
• United States v. Navarro
  737 F.2d 625· 7th Cir.· 1984-06-14 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying access to the informant's INS file or in restricting cross-examination regarding the informant's address and place of employment, and that entrapment was not established as a matter of law.
• United States v. Lara-Hernandez
  588 F.2d 272· 9th Cir.· 1978-12-19 ·cited 41×
  The court held that new theories of relevance for cross-examination, raised for the first time post-trial, are barred on appeal absent plain error, and that untimely motions for a new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel are properly denied.
• United States v. Wolfson
  573 F.2d 216· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-18 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the trial court committed reversible error by providing insufficient jury instructions regarding the relevance of yacht sales prices and by unduly limiting cross-examination concerning insurance amounts.
• United States v. Anthony
  565 F.2d 533· 8th Cir.· 1977-11-16 ·cited 41×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in allowing jurors to take notes, in its order of proof, in denying a mistrial for a potentially withheld Jencks Act statement, or in denying severance motions. The court also found sufficient evidence to support co
• Nelson v. State
  148 Fla. 338· Fla.· 1941-10-24 ·cited 41×·via Right To Confrontation
  Ben Nelson was convicted of manslaughter in the murder of Leroy Heath and sentenced to ten years in prison. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting challenges to the trial court's deferral of a pretrial conference with state witnesses, its jury instruction en
• Corona v. State
  64 So. 3d 1232· Fla.· 2011-06-09 ·cited 40×
  Sergio Corona was convicted of capital sexual battery on his eleven-year-old daughter based primarily on hearsay statements made by the victim to police, which were introduced through officer testimony. The Florida Supreme Court held that a pretrial discovery deposition does not
• United States v. Sodonnie Leroy Christopher
  923 F.2d 1545· 11th Cir.· 1991-02-21 ·cited 40×
  The court held that while certain hearsay testimony was erroneously admitted, the errors were harmless given the overwhelming evidence of guilt, and affirmed convictions but vacated one sentence for resentencing.
• United States v. Anderson
  881 F.2d 1128· D.C. Cir.· 1989-08-11 ·cited 40×
• United States v. Paris
  827 F.2d 395· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-06 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the district court should have excluded the out-of-court statements unless the government granted use immunity to the declarant, to ensure the defendant's right to a fair trial and confrontation.
• United States v. Ferlin K. Dorian
  803 F.2d 1439· 8th Cir.· 1986-10-27 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the testimony of Roxanne's foster mother, Monica Whiting, regarding statements made by Roxanne, lacked sufficient indicia of reliability and thus violated the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause.
• United States v. Picciandra
  788 F.2d 39· 1st Cir.· 1986-03-31 ·cited 40×
  The court held that pre-indictment delays did not violate due process rights, evidentiary rulings were proper, and jury instructions were adequate. The judgments of sentence are affirmed.
• United States v. Paone
  782 F.2d 386· 2d Cir.· 1986-02-05 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the admission of co-conspirators' statements did not violate the Federal Rules of Evidence or the Sixth Amendment confrontation clause, that appellant Marotta was not denied conflict-free counsel, that New York's corroboration of accomplice testimony requireme
• United States v. Tamer Trad Mourad
  729 F.2d 195· 2d Cir.· 1984-02-24 ·cited 40×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the appellants' convictions were largely affirmed, but Mourad's case was remanded for reconsideration of his sentence due to the merger of conspiracy and continuing criminal enterprise convictions.
• United States v. Valdez
  722 F.2d 1196· 5th Cir.· 1984-01-03 ·cited 40×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the admission of a law enforcement officer's post-hypnotic identification testimony was improper and prejudicial, especially when the identification was of a suspect known to the witness and was uncorroborated.
• United States v. Traylor
  656 F.2d 1326· 9th Cir.· 1981-09-21 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the search warrant was properly issued based on probable cause derived from DEA investigation and a narcotics detection dog's alert, and that the search of the handbags was within the scope of the warrant. It also held that while some hearsay testimony was imp
• State v. James
  402 So. 2d 1169· Fla.· 1981-07-23 ·cited 40×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that discovery depositions taken under Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.220(d) are not admissible as substantive evidence at trial, even when the witness has died or become unavailable, because the rules expressly limit their use to impeachment
• United States v. Miranda-Uriarte
  649 F.2d 1345· 9th Cir.· 1981-07-06 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the admission of coconspirator statements was proper, the evidence was sufficient to convict, and the trial court did not err in its rulings on jury instructions, evidence admission, or cross-examination.
• United States v. Hernandez
  608 F.2d 741· 9th Cir.· 1979-10-12 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying pre-trial disclosure of an informant's address, denying a continuance, excluding the public during the informant's testimony, or admitting an edited co-defendant statement, and properly rejected a duress jury instruction.
• United States v. Hickey
  596 F.2d 1082· 1st Cir.· 1979-04-19 ·cited 40×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that suppressed evidence obtained in violation of Miranda rights cannot be used to impeach a defendant's statements elicited on cross-examination if the defendant did not testify about the subject matter on direct examination. The court also held that a defendant d
• United States v. Poulack
  556 F.2d 83· 1st Cir.· 1977-05-26 ·cited 40×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance to allow the defendant to be represented by his preferred counsel, balancing the defendant's right to counsel against the need for an orderly and speedy trial. The court also held that the s
• United States v. Stassi
  544 F.2d 579· 2d Cir.· 1976-10-26 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that their various claims of procedural error, including issues related to a deported co-conspirator, speedy trial, admissibility of evidence, jury findings, and Brady material, were without
• Phillips v. Neil
  452 F.2d 337· 6th Cir.· 1971-12-07 ·cited 40×
  The admission of psychiatric reports, written by unidentified authors and not subject to cross-examination, violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, even if admissible under a state hearsay exception.
• Sinclair v. Turner
  447 F.2d 1158· 10th Cir.· 1971-09-10 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination and that the petitioner waived her right against self-incrimination by testifying. The exclusion of jurors conscientiously opposed to the death penalty did not violate due process or fa
• United States v. Dioguardi
  428 F.2d 1033· 2d Cir.· 1970-05-27 ·cited 40×·via Right To Confrontation
• United States v. Jess Boss Safley
  408 F.2d 603· 4th Cir.· 1969-03-17 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the denial of a severance was not reversible error, nor was the sufficiency of evidence regarding FDIC insurance or a flawed jury instruction, as any prejudice was either absent or harmless.
• Maguire v. United States
  396 F.2d 327· 9th Cir.· 1968-05-28 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction under the Dyer Act was valid, affirming the lower court's decisions regarding speedy trial, access to information, assistance of counsel, venue, search and seizure, and Miranda warnings.
• Belvin v. State
  922 So. 2d 1046· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-03-08 ·cited 39×
  Bruce Belvin challenges his DUI conviction based on the admission of a breath test affidavit without the opportunity to cross-examine the breath test technician. The Fourth District Court of Appeal grants certiorari, holding that portions of the breath test affidavit describing t
• State v. Clark
  614 So. 2d 453· Fla.· 1992-09-24 ·cited 39×
  Constitutional errors involving the improper admission of a discovery deposition as substantive evidence in violation of the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause are subject to harmless error analysis; however, when a deposition provides non-cumulative evidence not testified to b
• Bundy v. Dugger
  850 F.2d 1402· 11th Cir.· 1988-07-07 ·cited 39×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of habeas corpus relief, finding no abuse of the writ, no incompetence to stand trial, no denial of choice of counsel, no ineffective assistance of counsel, no improper Faretta inquiry, no constitutional issue regarding the race of t
• United States v. Kail
  804 F.2d 441· 8th Cir.· 1986-10-29 ·cited 39×
  The court held that the search warrant was valid, the evidence seized was admissible, and there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction for mail fraud.
• United States v. Mouzin
  785 F.2d 682· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-18 ·cited 39×
  A criminal defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel and Due Process rights are violated when their attorney is disbarred and fails to inform the client or the court of this fact, and the defendant is denied presence at an in camera discussion of the matter.
• United States v. Domina
  784 F.2d 1361· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-17 ·cited 39×
  The court should have applied the Supreme Court's test for identification reliability to in-court suggestive identification procedures, which would have led to the conclusion that the appellant was denied a fair trial.
• United States v. Burke
  738 F.2d 1225· 11th Cir.· 1984-08-13 ·cited 39×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in restricting cross-examination, denying a Jackson v. Denno hearing, admitting identification testimony, or admitting extrinsic offense evidence.
• United States v. Benavidez
  664 F.2d 1255· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-04 ·cited 39×
  The court held that a trial court's failure to fully comply with Rule 44(c) is not reversible error unless the defendant demonstrates an actual conflict of interest that adversely affected counsel's performance. The court also held that the trial court did not err in limiting cro
• United States v. Orlander Raymond Brown
  546 F.2d 166· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-31 ·cited 39×
  The court held that while restricting cross-examination regarding a probation officer's sentencing recommendation was error, it was harmless error, and the conviction is affirmed.
• United States v. Telesforo Ray Gomez
  529 F.2d 412· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-25 ·cited 39×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court adheres to the result of the main opinion but expresses concern over the admission of hearsay evidence.
• Hutchins v. State
  286 So. 2d 244· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-11-06 ·cited 39×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court affirmed a conviction for unlawful possession of a narcotic drug but addressed the admissibility of a video-taped deposition of an unavailable witness.
• Blanton v. State
  978 So. 2d 149· Fla.· 2008-03-13 ·cited 38×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a discovery deposition does not satisfy the Sixth Amendment's requirement of a prior opportunity for cross-examination under Crawford v. Washington, even though the defendant had the opportunity to depose the witness. However, the Court affirme
• G.C. v. Dep't of Child. & Families
  791 So. 2d 17· Fla. 5th DCA· 2001-03-30 ·cited 38×·via Right To Confrontation
  Parents appealed a dependency order finding their two daughters dependent on the state based on alleged sexual abuse by the father and mental abuse by the mother. The appellate court affirmed the finding of sexual abuse but reversed the mental abuse finding against the mother, ho
• Lawrence v. State
  691 So. 2d 1068· Fla.· 1997-03-13 ·cited 38×·via Right To Confrontation
  Michael Alan Lawrence appeals his death sentence imposed after remand from a prior appeal that vacated his original sentence due to evidentiary errors. The Florida Supreme Court affirms Lawrence's death sentence, finding that the trial court properly considered aggravating and mi
• United States v. DE LA Vega
  913 F.2d 861· 11th Cir.· 1990-10-02 ·cited 38×·via Sixth Amendment Right To Confront Witnesses
  The court affirmed the convictions of all appellants but vacated the sentences of Betancourt and De La Vega, remanding for re-sentencing.
• United States v. Bigelow
  914 F.2d 966· 7th Cir.· 1990-09-28 ·cited 38×·via Right To Confrontation
  The court affirmed the convictions of all defendants but vacated their sentences, remanding for resentencing consistent with the Sentencing Guidelines. The court found the 'ostrich instruction' appropriate for Lima, Bigelow's hearsay objections meritless, Vaughan's due process ch
• United States v. Smith
  869 F.2d 348· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-21 ·cited 38×
  The court held that spectrographic voice identification expert testimony is admissible under the Frye standard if a proper foundation is laid, and that the defendant's Confrontation Clause rights were not violated by the use of a substitute expert who relied on spectrograms prepa
• United States v. Dempsey
  733 F.2d 392· 6th Cir.· 1984-04-27 ·cited 38×·via Right To Confrontation
  A conspiracy charge under 21 U.S.C. § 846 does not require the indictment to allege an overt act, and the court affirmed the conviction.