Undue Prejudice

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

• Williams v. State
  110 So. 2d 654· Fla.· 1959-03-25 ·cited 2146×
  Ralph Williams was convicted of rape and sentenced to death. He appealed arguing that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of a similar incident six weeks prior involving another victim. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that similar fact evidence pointing to a s
• Bryan v. State
  533 So. 2d 744· Fla.· 1988-09-22 ·cited 181×
  Anthony Bryan was convicted of first-degree murder, kidnapping with a firearm, and robbery with a firearm for killing George Wilson in Mississippi during the course of kidnapping and robbery. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and death sentence, rejecting challen
• Brooks v. State
  918 So. 2d 181· Fla.· 2005-06-23 ·cited 158×
  This case involves Lamar Brooks' appeal of his conviction and death sentences for the first-degree murders of Rachel Carlson and her infant daughter, Alexis Stuart. This is Brooks' second appeal after his initial conviction was reversed in 2001 due to erroneous hearsay testimony.
• J.R. Bryson v. City OF Waycross
  888 F.2d 1562· 11th Cir.· 1989-11-30 ·cited 136×
  The court held that a police officer's disruptive speech, even if concerning public matters, is not protected by the First Amendment when it significantly impairs governmental efficiency, and that denying a motion to amend a complaint to add an equal protection claim was not an a
• Leach v. State
  132 So. 2d 329· Fla.· 1961-06-16 ·cited 111×
  Appellants Leach and Smith were convicted of first-degree murder without a mercy recommendation for killing a cellmate in a maximum-security prison cell. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting arguments regarding admission of photographs, voluntary confessio
• United States v. Ring
  513 F.2d 1001· 6th Cir.· 1975-04-02 ·cited 98×
  The court held that evidence of prior threats was inadmissible to show criminal intent when intent is inferable from the act itself and the defendant has not asserted a defense of innocent state of mind.
• Williams v. State
  621 So. 2d 413· Fla.· 1993-07-01 ·cited 80×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that testimony about similar sexual battery incidents is admissible to rebut a consent defense when the evidence shows a common plan or scheme, not merely to prove propensity. The Court approved the admission of testimony from two prior victims desc
• Hooper v. Stokes
  107 Fla. 607· Fla.· 1933-01-09 ·cited 80×
  George T. Hooper sought to revoke his father's will on grounds of insane delusion, claiming the testator was mentally unsound when he executed the will leaving the son only a transcript of divorce proceedings and imposing conditions on other legatees. The Florida Supreme Court af
• Gillion v. State
  573 So. 2d 810· Fla.· 1991-01-10 ·cited 77×
  Testimony that a police officer observed criminal activity in the specific area where a defendant was arrested does not constitute unduly prejudicial identification of the location as a high-crime area when the testimony describes what the officer actually observed rather than th
• United States v. Jones
  913 F.2d 1552· 11th Cir.· 1990-10-11 ·cited 77×
  The court held that the evidence presented was sufficient to sustain the convictions of all defendants for conspiracy and possession of cocaine with intent to distribute.
• State v. Augustus J. Rawls
  649 So. 2d 1350· Fla.· 1994-10-27 ·cited 73×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the admission of evidence of Rawls's prior sexual batteries of other young males to corroborate the victim's testimony in a capital sexual battery case, even though Rawls was not in a familial relationship with the charged victim. The Court expand
• United States v. Hitsman
  604 F.2d 443· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-15 ·cited 68×
  The court affirmed all convictions, finding sufficient evidence and no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on evidence, jury instructions, or motions.
• Howey v. United States
  481 F.2d 1187· 9th Cir.· 1973-07-03 ·cited 65×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying the government's motion to amend its third-party complaint against RCA without a showing of undue prejudice, and that the subcontract with Universal Services did not require indemnification for the government
• United States v. Zeuli
  725 F.2d 813· 1st Cir.· 1984-01-19 ·cited 64×
  The court held that evidence of other bad acts was admissible to prove intent in a conspiracy case and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting such evidence or in refusing a jury instruction on a theory not supported by the facts.
• United States v. Terebecki
  692 F.2d 1345· 11th Cir.· 1982-12-06 ·cited 62×
  The trial court abused its discretion by excluding evidence relevant to the defendant's intent to defraud.
• Webb v. City OF Chester
  813 F.2d 824· 7th Cir.· 1987-03-06 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the district judge did not err in denying the defendants' motion for a directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and that the admission of expert testimony was proper.
• United States v. Fierson
  419 F.2d 1020· 7th Cir.· 1969-12-17 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of a prior similar offense was proper to prove intent, and the district judge did not abuse discretion.
• United States v. Hooton
  662 F.2d 628· 9th Cir.· 1981-11-30 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to suppress statements, admitting live-witness testimony, admitting evidence of other acts, excluding evidence on typical collector activity, or giving an Allen charge.
• United States v. Lindell
  881 F.2d 1313· 5th Cir.· 1989-08-17 ·cited 56×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the joinder of defendants, evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, sufficiency of evidence, sentencing, or miscellaneous claims.
• The Troxel Mfg. Co. v. Schwinn Bicycle Co.
  489 F.2d 968· 6th Cir.· 1973-12-19 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the denial of Troxel's motion to amend its pleadings was not an abuse of discretion, but reversed the denial of Schwinn's counterclaim for royalties due before the patent's invalidation.
• United States v. Ricardo
  619 F.2d 1124· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-25 ·cited 51×
  The court held that extraterritorial jurisdiction attaches for conspiracy if intended territorial effects are shown, even without an overt act in the U.S., and that evidence seized and admitted was lawful.
• United States v. Jenkins
  525 F.2d 819· 6th Cir.· 1975-11-12 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the affidavit was sufficient to establish probable cause for the search warrant, and evidentiary rulings were not an abuse of discretion.
• Coventry v. United States Steel Corp. Pa. Human Relations Comm'n
  856 F.2d 514· 3d Cir.· 1988-08-26 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the plaintiff's motion to amend his complaint and in finding that the plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily waived his ADEA claims.
• United States v. O'Malley
  707 F.2d 1240· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-23 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for mail fraud and extortion, that cross-examination regarding unreported campaign contributions was proper impeachment, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion for severance.
• United States v. Barnes
  586 F.2d 1052· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-22 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit plain error by failing to sua sponte instruct the jury on the limited use of impeachment evidence or prior offenses, and that the admission of a coconspirator's hearsay statement, though erroneous, did not substantially influence
• Morton A. Kier v. Commercial Union Ins. Cos.
  808 F.2d 1254· 7th Cir.· 1987-01-06 ·cited 44×
  A reasonable jury could not conclude that the defendant violated the Age Discrimination and Employment Act (ADEA), and therefore the district court's order granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict is affirmed.
• Israel v. State
  837 So. 2d 381· Fla.· 2002-12-19 ·cited 43×
  Connie Ray Israel was convicted of first-degree murder in the December 1991 death of Esther Hagans and sentenced to death. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and death sentence, rejecting claims of trial error related to his courtroom presence, restraints, jury com
• Cornelious Perry v. Rushen
  713 F.2d 1447· 9th Cir.· 1983-08-26 ·cited 43×
  The exclusion of evidence suggesting a third party committed the crime did not violate the defendant's constitutional rights because the evidence was collateral, lacked probity, and did not directly connect the third party to the offense.
• Alva B. Harper v. United States
  239 F.2d 945· D.C. Cir.· 1956-11-21 ·cited 40×
• Nat'l Distillers & Chem. Corp. v. Brad's Mach. Prods., Inc.
  666 F.2d 492· 11th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 39×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying amendments, admitting expert testimony, or in its jury instructions, and that the Robinson-Patman Act requires actual competition.
• Cornell & Co., Inc. v. Occupational Safety & Health Review Comm'n & Sec'y of Labor
  573 F.2d 820· 3d Cir.· 1978-03-09 ·cited 38×
  The Commission abused its discretion by allowing the Secretary to amend the citation and complaint late in the proceedings, as this prejudiced the employer's ability to present its sole defense.
• United States v. Jardina
  747 F.2d 945· 5th Cir.· 1984-11-15 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the defendant's inculpatory statements, the counterfeit bills, and evidence of Texas activities were admissible, and that no unreasonable delay occurred before his appearance before a magistrate.
• United States v. Jimenez
  613 F.2d 1373· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-21 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the prosecutor's cross-examination of the defendant about possession of cocaine, an unrelated offense occurring a year later, violated Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) because the evidence was not relevant to any issue other than the defendant's character and w
• State v. Kurtz
  354 So. 2d 890· Fla. 4th DCA· 1978-01-10 ·cited 36×
  A criminal defendant's motion for continuance, when granted, removes the case from the strict application of the Speedy Trial Rule.
• Loughan v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
  749 F.2d 1519· 11th Cir.· 1985-01-10 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of the plaintiff's drinking habit, granting a directed verdict on the duty to warn, denying a motion to amend the complaint, or in its assessment of costs.
• Fittipaldi USA, Inc. v. Helio Castroneves
  905 So. 2d 182· Fla. 3d DCA· 2005-03-30 ·cited 30×
  Fittipaldi USA, Inc. appeals a jury verdict in a breach of contract dispute with race car driver Helio Castroneves. The court affirmed the judgment, finding that while the trial court erred in allowing attorney Alan Miller's undisclosed expert testimony regarding contract quality
• Bobb v. State
  647 So. 2d 881· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-11-09 ·cited 30×
  Terrance Bobb appeals his manslaughter conviction, challenging the trial court's limitation of cross-examination regarding a prosecution witness's prior felony convictions. The Fourth District affirms, holding that trial courts properly limit impeachment questioning to whether a
• Armco, Inc. v. Armco Burglar Alarm Co., Inc.
  693 F.2d 1155· 5th Cir.· 1982-12-20 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the trial court's finding of likelihood of confusion was not clearly erroneous, but erred in its application of the laches defense by using an incorrect starting date for the delay.
• United States v. Matthews
  431 F.3d 1296· 11th Cir.· 2005-12-06 ·cited 29×
  Terrance Matthews was convicted of conspiracy to distribute five or more kilograms of cocaine and two counts of obstruction of justice by intimidation of a witness. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed, holding that wiretap recordings were properly sealed within one to two days of the o
• Hodges v. State
  403 So. 2d 1375· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-09-30 ·cited 29×
  In a sexual battery case where consent was the central issue, the Florida appellate court reversed the defendant's conviction because the trial court improperly admitted similar fact evidence of a prior sexual encounter to show the defendant's propensity to use force. The court h
• United States v. Anderson
  933 F.2d 1261· 5th Cir.· 1991-06-07 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the admissibility of evidence of prior fires at the defendant's factory could not be determined on the record due to the trial court's failure to properly apply the Beechum test and Rule 104(b) regarding conditional relevancy.
• United States v. Nichols
  534 F.2d 202· 9th Cir.· 1976-04-13 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's requests for depositions at government expense and in admitting evidence of prior similar offenses to prove intent.
• United States v. Cunningham
  529 F.2d 884· 6th Cir.· 1976-02-09 ·cited 28×
  The court held that cross-examination based on unreliable hearsay and suspicion, even if drawing negative answers, is prejudicial when the defense is solely entrapment. It also held that increased sentences after withdrawal of guilty pleas, based on a fuller understanding of the
• United States v. Merrill H. Klein
  515 F.2d 751· 3d Cir.· 1975-04-30 ·cited 28×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to prove the appellant knew he was dealing with a conspiracy to defraud insurance companies.
• Smith v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.
  633 F.2d 401· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-22 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence of prior fires and did not err in concluding the trustee in bankruptcy was not an indispensable party.
• United States v. Cuch
  842 F.2d 1173· 10th Cir.· 1988-03-14 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior similar sexual assault to prove intent, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.
• United States v. Lacayo
  758 F.2d 1559· 11th Cir.· 1985-04-30 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying disclosure of the government's right to make a sentencing recommendation for co-defendants, admitting extrinsic act evidence, or admitting prejudicial evidence, and that prosecutorial misconduct did not rise to the lev
• United States v. Baldivid
  465 F.2d 1277· 4th Cir.· 1972-08-21 ·cited 26×
  The court held that evidence of prior crimes was admissible to prove intent and knowledge, and that the value of the stolen property was sufficiently established for jurisdictional purposes.
• Nat'l Indep. Theatre Exhibitors, Inc. v. Charter Fin. Grp., Inc.
  747 F.2d 1396· 11th Cir.· 1984-12-05 ·cited 25×
  The court affirmed the district court's rulings, finding no reversible error in the directed verdicts, jury instructions, or denial of leave to amend the complaint.
• United States v. Sellers
  926 F.2d 410· 5th Cir.· 1991-03-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding prior dumping was proper, the jury instructions regarding knowledge were not plain error, and the sentencing guidelines were correctly applied.