Unfair Prejudice

888 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 386 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Mohel
  604 F.2d 748· 2d Cir.· 1979-07-31 ·cited 50×
  The court held that admitting evidence of prior similar acts to prove intent and knowledge was reversible error when the defense had unequivocally conceded those elements.
• United States v. Dolliole
  597 F.2d 102· 7th Cir.· 1979-04-20 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of prior crimes was permissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to prove intent, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting such evidence or in limiting cross-examination.
• United States v. Impson
  531 F.2d 274· 5th Cir.· 1976-05-10 ·cited 50×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The court held that eliciting testimony about a defendant's silence at the time of arrest, without proper justification, is prejudicial error that is not cured by a jury instruction, especially when the silence occurs before Miranda warnings are given.
• Special v. Ivo Baux, M.D.
  79 So. 3d 755· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-11-16 ·cited 49×
  This medical malpractice case involves the death of a pregnant woman during cesarean delivery. The court addresses whether a trial court's restriction on cross-examination of a defense expert regarding unusually high rates of amniotic fluid embolus (AFE) diagnoses at the hospital
• Christophersen v. Allied-Signal Corp.
  939 F.2d 1106· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-15 ·cited 48×
  The court's majority opinion, by reinterpreting Federal Rules of Evidence 702 and 703, effectively shifts the determination of scientific methodology disputes from juries to district judges, thereby terminating cases before trial if the methodology lacks general acceptance.
• United States v. Gonzalez
  933 F.2d 417· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-01 ·cited 48×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentence, holding that the indictment was not multiplicitous, severance was not required, the display of cocaine was proper, expert testimony was admissible, and there was sufficient evidence for the convictions.
• United States v. King
  713 F.2d 627· 11th Cir.· 1983-08-29 ·cited 48×
  The court held that prior trial testimony of a deceased witness, admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 804(b)(1), should not be excluded under Federal Rule of Evidence 403 solely because the jury cannot observe the witness's demeanor, especially when the testimony is essentia
• United States v. Carter
  528 F.2d 844· 8th Cir.· 1975-12-10 ·cited 48×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to suppress impeachment evidence of prior felony convictions, nor did it err in its handling of peremptory challenges, questioning of a witness, or comments on the evidence, thus affirming the conviction.
• United States v. Jenkins
  525 F.2d 819· 6th Cir.· 1975-11-12 ·cited 48×·via Undue Prejudice
  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.
• United States v. Ambrose
  483 F.2d 742· 6th Cir.· 1973-08-28 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the admission of unreliable hearsay evidence regarding the defendant's reputation required reversal of the conviction. It also found the jury instructions on entrapment to be erroneous.
• Coventry v. United States Steel Corp. Pa. Human Relations Comm'n
  856 F.2d 514· 3d Cir.· 1988-08-26 ·cited 47×·via Undue Prejudice
  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.
• State v. Page
  449 So. 2d 813· Fla.· 1984-04-26 ·cited 47×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that petit theft convictions are per se crimes of dishonesty admissible for impeachment under Florida's evidence code, rejecting the First District's narrow interpretation requiring proof of affirmative misstatement or misrepresentation. The Court r
• United States v. Rosa
  705 F.2d 1375· 1st Cir.· 1983-04-11 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of a death threat, in its jury instructions on aiding and abetting, or in refusing a special cautionary instruction for a witness with a mental condition.
• United States v. West
  898 F.2d 1493· 11th Cir.· 1990-04-25 ·cited 46×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that evidentiary rulings were not abuses of discretion, the jury instructions were proper, and the sentencing guidelines were valid.
• Clark v. State
  443 So. 2d 973· Fla.· 1983-12-22 ·cited 46×·via Prejudicial Impact
  Larry Clark appeals his conviction for first-degree murder and death sentence in connection with a 1981 robbery and shooting deaths in Tampa. The Florida Supreme Court affirms both the conviction and sentence, rejecting Clark's evidentiary and constitutional challenges.
• United States v. O'Malley
  707 F.2d 1240· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-23 ·cited 46×·via Undue Prejudice
  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.
• Yolanda and Terrence Ballou v. Henri Studios, Inc.
  656 F.2d 1147· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-25 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by excluding the results of a blood alcohol test based on credibility and prejudice concerns, and that chain of custody issues go to the weight, not admissibility, of evidence.
• United States v. Shavers
  615 F.2d 266· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-08 ·cited 46×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The court held that the prosecutor's impeachment of the defendant with his prior silence and the admission of prejudicial extrinsic evidence constituted reversible error.
• Johnson v. United States
  506 F.2d 640· 8th Cir.· 1974-11-18 ·cited 46×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The court affirmed the conviction and the denial of post-conviction relief, holding that the jury instructions were proper, the search warrant was valid, and the defendant received adequate assistance of counsel.
• White v. Westlund
  624 So. 2d 1148· Fla. 4th DCA· 1993-09-15 ·cited 45×
  Jeffrey White appeals a jury verdict in favor of George and Delores Westlund arising from an automobile accident. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirms the judgment, rejecting White's challenges to the admission of expert testimony on future medical procedures, accident-rel
• United States v. Barnes
  586 F.2d 1052· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-22 ·cited 45×·via Undue Prejudice
  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
• Joshea J. Gilliams v. State
  262 So. 3d 869· Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-01-22 ·cited 44×
  The court affirmed a conviction where the defendant argued that inadequate medical treatment was an intervening cause of death, breaking the causal chain. The court held that when a defendant inflicts a life-threatening wound, subsequent medical malpractice or suboptimal medical
• United States v. Morgan
  936 F.2d 1561· 10th Cir.· 1991-06-28 ·cited 44×
  A warrantless search of a bag thrown by an arrestee is unconstitutional if it is not abandoned, not incident to arrest due to remoteness, and not a valid inventory search due to lack of standardized procedures and investigative motive.
• Dieter Riechmann v. State
  581 So. 2d 133· Fla.· 1991-05-30 ·cited 44×
  Dieter Riechmann appeals his conviction for first-degree murder and death sentence for killing his long-term companion Kersten Kischnick in Miami Beach in 1987. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the conviction and death sentence, finding sufficient evidence of guilt and no consti
• United States v. Sorondo
  845 F.2d 945· 11th Cir.· 1988-05-23 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding the number of convictions obtained with an informant's assistance constituted plain error, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• Morton A. Kier v. Commercial Union Ins. Cos.
  808 F.2d 1254· 7th Cir.· 1987-01-06 ·cited 44×·via Undue Prejudice
  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.
• Soden v. Freightliner Corp.
  714 F.2d 498· 5th Cir.· 1983-09-12 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding statistical and opinion evidence from Freightliner's expert due to lack of a proper predicate and in admitting evidence of prior lawsuits against Freightliner with a limiting instruction to show notice.
• United States v. Oliver
  525 F.2d 731· 8th Cir.· 1975-10-31 ·cited 44×·via Prejudicial Impact
• Jackson v. State
  89 So. 3d 1011· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-05-30 ·cited 43×
  Michael Jackson was convicted of first-degree murder for shooting a drug dealer. On appeal, Jackson challenged the prosecutor's closing argument characterizing the chief witness as honest and the admission of detective testimony about neighborhood reluctance to cooperate with pol
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Kramer
  778 F. Supp. 2d 1320· M.D. Fla.· 2011-04-01 ·cited 43×
  The court held that Baker's statements were inadmissible hearsay and granted Kramer's motion to exclude them. The court also sustained Kramer's objection to the magistrate judge's order denying his Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of the Commission.
• Israel v. State
  837 So. 2d 381· Fla.· 2002-12-19 ·cited 43×·via Undue Prejudice
  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×·via Undue Prejudice
  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.
• Swafford v. State
  125 So. 3d 760· Fla.· 2013-11-07 ·cited 42×
  Roy Clifton Swafford, sentenced to death for the 1982 sexual battery and first-degree murder of Brenda Rucker, sought postconviction relief based on newly discovered forensic evidence. The Florida Supreme Court reversed his convictions and death sentence, finding that 2005 retest
• United States v. Davis
  838 F.2d 909· 7th Cir.· 1988-01-25 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction and that the admission of 'other acts' evidence and testimony regarding co-conspirators' convictions was proper.
• Anne Onujiogu v. United States
  817 F.2d 3· 1st Cir.· 1987-04-30 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the hospital record notation as evidence, as it was properly admissible as a party admission.
• United States v. Guinn Dutton Hodges
  770 F.2d 1475· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-12 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the admission of evidence regarding the defendant's subsequent extortion attempt was reversible error because it was highly prejudicial and of slight probative value.
• Johnson v. William C. Ellis & Sons Iron Works, Inc.
  604 F.2d 950· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-18 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the repairer (Ellis) was not liable as it did not create or aggravate the dangerous condition and had no duty to warn of obvious dangers. The court reversed the judgment for the manufacturer (Long Reach) due to trial errors, including improperly directing a ve
• United States v. Dwyer
  539 F.2d 924· 2d Cir.· 1976-07-26 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the trial judge's exclusion of critical defense psychiatric testimony, without stating reasons, constituted an abuse of discretion under Rule 403, requiring reversal of Dwyer's conviction.
• Lancelot Uriley Armstrong v. State
  73 So. 3d 155· Fla.· 2011-09-22 ·cited 41×
  Lancelot Armstrong was convicted of murdering Deputy Sheriff John Greeney and attempted murder of Deputy Sheriff Robert Sallustio during an armed robbery in 1990. After his death sentence was vacated on collateral review due to an invalidated prior violent felony conviction, Arms
• United States v. Lopez
  803 F.2d 969· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-04 ·cited 41×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the admission of evidence was proper, prosecutorial comments were not reversible error, the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions, and statutory interpretations were correct.
• Peterson v. State
  94 So. 3d 514· Fla.· 2012-05-17 ·cited 40×
  Robert Earl Peterson appeals his conviction and death sentence for the August 8, 2005 first-degree murder of his 64-year-old stepfather, Roy Andrews. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Peterson's convictions for first-degree murder and tampering with evidence, as well as his deat
• United States v. Donley
  878 F.2d 735· 3d Cir.· 1989-06-30 ·cited 40×
  The court held that hearsay statements by the victim were admissible to show her state of mind and plan, and that the Sentencing Reform Acts did not alter the mandatory life sentence for first-degree murder under 18 U.S.C. § 1111.
• United States v. Jimenez-Perez
  869 F.2d 9· 1st Cir.· 1989-03-06 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions and that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of the marijuana's street value.
• United States v. Nicodemo Scarfo
  850 F.2d 1015· 3d Cir.· 1988-06-29 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in empaneling an anonymous jury or admitting evidence of other crimes, and that limiting instructions were appropriate.
• United States v. Goff
  847 F.2d 149· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-02 ·cited 40×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The court clarified its prior opinion, correcting misleading language regarding double jeopardy vacaturs for certain counts of conspiracy to import and possess.
• United States v. Herb Neal
  718 F.2d 1505· 10th Cir.· 1983-09-30 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove mail fraud, the admission of certain evidence was not an abuse of discretion, and the denial of a change of venue was proper.
• United States v. Moss
  544 F.2d 954· 8th Cir.· 1976-11-12 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the admission of certain hearsay statements was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evidentiary rulings or in appointing experts.
• Alva B. Harper v. United States
  239 F.2d 945· D.C. Cir.· 1956-11-21 ·cited 40×·via Undue Prejudice
• Nat'l Distillers & Chem. Corp. v. Brad's Mach. Prods., Inc.
  666 F.2d 492· 11th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 39×·via Undue Prejudice
  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.
• United States v. Kaiser
  545 F.2d 467· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-14 ·cited 39×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The majority opinion reversed the death sentence, finding the death penalty provision of 18 U.S.C. § 1111 unconstitutional due to standardless jury discretion. The dissenting judge disagreed, arguing the statute's constitutionality was not clearly settled by precedent and that th