Trustworthiness Of Evidence

36 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Barrett
  539 F.2d 244· 1st Cir.· 1976-06-22 ·cited 104×
  The court held that evidence of the defendant's knowledge of alarm systems was admissible to prove identity, and that a statement against interest offered to exculpate the accused must be assessed for trustworthiness with corroborating circumstances.
• Grotrian v. Steinway & Sons
  523 F.2d 1331· 2d Cir.· 1975-07-09 ·cited 59×
  The court held that Grotrian intentionally infringed upon Steinway's trademarks and engaged in unfair competition, affirming the dismissal of Grotrian's complaint but modifying the scope of relief granted to Steinway.
• Muncie Aviation Corp. v. Party Doll Fleet, Inc.
  519 F.2d 1178· 5th Cir.· 1975-09-25 ·cited 46×
  Advisory materials published by a governmental agency, even without the force of law, are admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule if they are relevant to negligence and otherwise trustworthy.
• Cotton v. State
  763 So. 2d 437· Fla. 4th DCA· 2000-06-09 ·cited 45×
  A defendant's out-of-court exculpatory statement offered for the truth of its content is inadmissible hearsay unless it falls within a recognized exception to the hearsay rule or qualifies under fairness principles such as the rule of completeness. The trial court did not abuse i
• United States v. Robinson
  544 F.2d 110· 2d Cir.· 1976-10-29 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the exclusion of testimony suggesting a third party resembled the bank robber, and the admission of unemployment records to impeach an alibi witness based on an incomplete search, were erroneous evidentiary rulings that prejudiced the defendant's substantial r
• Garcia v. State
  564 So. 2d 124· Fla.· 1990-06-14 ·cited 32×
  Henry Garcia was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death based largely on a coworker's testimony claiming to have heard Garcia confess to killing two elderly women. The Florida Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the tri
• In re the Complaint of Paducah Towing Co., Inc. v. Paducah Towing Co., Inc.
  692 F.2d 412· 6th Cir.· 1982-11-02 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the district court erred in admitting hearsay testimony and factual findings without proper foundation, and that the Endeavour's crew was also negligent, contributing to the accident.
• The Sch. Bd. OF Broward Cnty. v. Dep't OF Health
  525 F.2d 900· 5th Cir.· 1976-01-07 ·cited 26×
  The court held that hearsay evidence, under proper circumstances and with indicia of reliability, can constitute substantial evidence in administrative proceedings, and that the hearing examiner exceeded his authority by ordering repayment of funds.
• Alexander v. State
  627 So. 2d 35· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-11-12 ·cited 21×
  Christopher Harold Alexander was convicted of second-degree murder with a firearm in the shooting death of Gabriel Mahoney. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed the conviction, holding that the trial court erred in excluding testimony about Alexander's exclamations and a
• Comfort v. State
  597 So. 2d 944· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-04-29 ·cited 18×
  Albert Comfort appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief. The appellate court reverses in part regarding an ineffective assistance of counsel claim based on the failure to call an alibi witness, but affirms the rejection of newly discovered evidence of vi
• United States v. Garle A. Whitson
  587 F.2d 948· 9th Cir.· 1978-06-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that sworn denials on cross-examination open the door to otherwise Miranda-barred statements for impeachment purposes, as the privilege against self-incrimination does not protect perjury.
• United States v. Gerhart
  538 F.2d 807· 8th Cir.· 1976-08-02 ·cited 16×
  A photocopy of a photocopy of a lost original document is admissible as secondary evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 1004(1) if the proponent shows the original was lost and the secondary evidence is trustworthy.
• United States v. Glenn
  473 F.2d 191· D.C. Cir.· 1972-12-22 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial judge's evidentiary ruling on the admissibility of spontaneous utterances was not an abuse of discretion, as it was not arbitrary, fanciful, clearly unreasonable, or clearly erroneous.
• United States v. Williams
  571 F.2d 344· 6th Cir.· 1978-02-22 ·cited 12×
  A prior written statement adopted by a witness, even if written by another, is admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(5) as recorded recollection if the witness once had knowledge but now has insufficient recollection, and the statement was made or adopted when the matter
• United States v. Murray Bernard Weiner
  479 F.2d 923· 2d Cir.· 1973-04-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that sufficient corroborating evidence existed to satisfy the two-witness rule for the perjury conviction, and that the defendant's admissions were sufficient to establish falsity for some charges.
• Dykes v. Quincy Tel. Co.
  539 So. 2d 503· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-02-15 ·cited 9×
  Two consolidated employment discrimination cases in which the appellants challenged summary judgments granted to their former employer, Quincy Telephone Company. The court held that hearing officers' recommended orders from the Division of Administrative Hearings were inadmissibl
• United States v. Anderson
  929 F.2d 96· 2d Cir.· 1991-04-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that misleading statements by an agent after Miranda warnings, suggesting cooperation would be forfeited by requesting a lawyer, rendered the initial confession involuntary. This taint also rendered a subsequent confession involuntary.
• Butler v. S. Pac. Co.
  431 F.2d 77· 5th Cir.· 1970-08-27 ·cited 8×
  The exclusion of a safety report, which constituted an admission by the defendant and was trustworthy evidence, was an error requiring a new trial.
• King v. Auto Supply OF Jupiter, Inc.
  917 So. 2d 1015· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-01-05 ·cited 7×
  In this workers' compensation appeal, the Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the denial of claims for attendant care, home modifications, and compensability of vocal cord paralysis. The court held that a treating physician's opinion testimony regarding medical necessity co
• United States v. Porter
  986 F.2d 1014· 6th Cir.· 1993-02-25 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision to admit the evidence, finding no abuse of discretion.
• Nowlin v. State
  320 So. 2d 468· Fla. 4th DCA· 1975-01-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the robbery, use of a firearm, and aggravated assault on the robbery victim constitute facets of the same transaction, thus consecutive sentences are improper.
• Warner R. Waddell and Jeanette I. Waddell v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  841 F.2d 264· 9th Cir.· 1988-02-26 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the Tax Court's determination that the principal of the promissory note did not constitute true debt for tax purposes and upheld the exclusion of an appraisal report as a business record.
• United States v. Clark
  553 F.2d 504· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that statements obtained in violation of Miranda, if trustworthy, are admissible for impeachment purposes. The court also held that the admission of signed rights forms and the appointed counsel system did not constitute error.
• Alesi v. Craven
  440 F.2d 975· 9th Cir.· 1971-04-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that statements coerced during plea negotiations and a subsequent probation interview are involuntary and cannot be used for impeachment, even after Harris v. New York.
• Sigismondi v. State
  380 So. 3d 1208· Fla. 2d DCA· 2024-01-12 ·cited 2×
  The appellate court affirmed a conviction for third-degree felony murder, specifically addressing the exclusion of defense witness testimony. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding a victim's prior statement as hearsay because it was too rem
• United States v. Freidin
  849 F.2d 716· 2d Cir.· 1988-06-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a memorandum was inadmissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence 803(6) because it was not shown to have been made pursuant to a regular practice of the business, even if it possessed indicia of trustworthiness.
• Ballesteros v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd.
  1990 WL 47626· S.D. Fla.· 2013-02-13 ·cited 1×
• United States v. Aisenberg
  120 F. Supp. 2d 1345· M.D. Fla.· 2000-11-09 ·cited 1×
  A recording is legally audible and admissible if it is sufficiently reliable and trustworthy for its intended evidentiary purpose, even if partially inaudible. The trial judge has discretion to determine audibility based on specific facts and circumstances.
• United States v. Gaynor
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-02-09
  The court granted in part and denied in part the parties' motions in limine, ruling on the admissibility of various financial records, a biographical book, and evidence of the defendant's prior FBAR proceedings.
• Blanco v. Creative Mgmt. Servs.
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-10-17
  The judge of compensation claims did not abuse discretion in denying workers' compensation benefits where the claimant failed to prove that occupational dust exposure, rather than his seventeen-year smoking history, was the major contributing cause of his respiratory condition. A
• United States v. Jenkins
  499 F. Supp. 2d 1268· M.D. Fla.· 2007-06-05
  The court held that prosecutorial comments on the defendant's post-Miranda refusal to provide a sworn written statement constituted a Doyle violation, as the defendant did not open the door to such commentary by attempting to create a false impression of cooperation.
• Romano v. Howarth
  998 F.2d 101· 2d Cir.· 1993-07-02
  The court held that the special interrogatories submitted to the jury inaccurately framed the issues and that the admission of the progress notes was improper hearsay.
• Distaff v. Springfield Contracting Corp.
  984 F.2d 108· 4th Cir.· 1993-01-13
  The court held that the appeal should not be dismissed and that the district court erred in excluding the investigative report solely because the author could not be cross-examined, but affirmed the limitation of causes of action to negligence.