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. Hadaway
  681 F.2d 214· 4th Cir.· 1982-06-10 ·cited 32×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The court held that the admission of evidence of a criminal defendant's similar bad acts, even if relevant for intent, was improper when it served only to show propensity and was unduly prejudicial.
• United States v. Bruner
  657 F.2d 1278· D.C. Cir.· 1981-06-23 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the admission of prescriptions under the business records exception or coconspirator rule was proper, and that the failure to give immediate limiting instructions on prior inconsistent statements was not prejudicial error.
• Oberst v. Int'l Harvester Co., Inc.
  640 F.2d 863· 7th Cir.· 1980-09-19 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the exclusion of evidence regarding the commercial availability of alternative bunk restraints was harmless error, as other evidence presented strongly implied such availability and the feasibility of alternatives was not controverted.
• United States v. McDANIEL
  574 F.2d 1224· 5th Cir.· 1978-06-12 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the warrantless seizure of a briefcase from an airline, after a private search by airline personnel, did not violate the Fourth Amendment, and the admission of related evidence was proper.
• Giblin v. United States
  523 F.2d 42· 8th Cir.· 1975-09-05 ·cited 32×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the kidnapping conviction, the admission of the photograph was not unduly prejudicial, the hearsay testimony was admissible or harmless, and the sentence was not cruel and unusual punishment.
• Loughan v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
  749 F.2d 1519· 11th Cir.· 1985-01-10 ·cited 31×·via Undue Prejudice
  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.
• Archangel Angelo v. Bacharach Instrument Co.
  555 F.2d 1164· 3d Cir.· 1977-05-10 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence to support an inference that the jobs of Bench Assemblers and Heavy Assemblers were substantially equal in content, skill, effort, and responsibility, as required by the Equal Pay Act.
• Delisle v. Crane Co.
  258 So. 3d 1219· Fla.· 2018-10-15 ·cited 30×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a 2013 legislative amendment to section 90.702 of the Florida Evidence Code, which replaced the Frye test with the Daubert standard for expert testimony, was unconstitutional as an infringement on the Court's rulemaking authority. The Court rea
• Victorino v. State
  127 So. 3d 478· Fla.· 2013-10-10 ·cited 30×
  Troy Victorino was convicted of six counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. On appeal of his postconviction relief motion, he challenged numerous aspects of his trial, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington and a constit
• Saleeby v. Rocky Elson Constr., Inc.
  3 So. 3d 1078· Fla.· 2009-01-30 ·cited 30×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Florida Statutes §768.041(3) and §90.408 unambiguously prohibit admission of evidence of settlement and dismissal of defendants to the jury under all circumstances, including to impeach witness credibility, and that violation constitutes revers
• H & H Elec., Inc. v. Lopez
  967 So. 2d 345· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-10-10 ·cited 30×·via Prejudicial Impact
  H & H Electric and its employee Zanti appealed a jury verdict awarding $435,968.16 to Lopez for injuries sustained in a motorcycle-truck collision. The appellate court affirmed, finding no abuse of discretion in the trial court's preclusion of expert testimony about surveillance
• Fittipaldi USA, Inc. v. Helio Castroneves
  905 So. 2d 182· Fla. 3d DCA· 2005-03-30 ·cited 30×·via Undue Prejudice
  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×·via Undue Prejudice
  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
• Kaplan v. State
  451 So. 2d 1386· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-06-13 ·cited 30×
  Evidence of a victim's prior sexual conduct is admissible under Florida's rape shield statute only when it establishes a pattern of conduct or behavior so distinctive and closely resembling the defendant's version of the alleged encounter that it tends to prove consent, and a sin
• United States v. McCRARY
  699 F.2d 1308· 11th Cir.· 1983-03-18 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed the defendant's conviction, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on variance, admission of evidence, sufficiency of evidence, or suppression of evidence.
• Armco, Inc. v. Armco Burglar Alarm Co., Inc.
  693 F.2d 1155· 5th Cir.· 1982-12-20 ·cited 30×·via Undue Prejudice
  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.
• DeVASTO v. Faherty
  658 F.2d 859· 1st Cir.· 1981-09-11 ·cited 30×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The admission of evidence found during an unlawful search, without proper limiting instructions, was not harmless error and requires a new trial. The district court also erred in denying plaintiff's motion to amend her complaint to add the City of Boston as a defendant.
• United States v. Byers
  600 F.2d 1130· 5th Cir.· 1979-08-13 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the defendants lacked standing to challenge the searches of abandoned vessels and that the evidence presented was sufficient for conviction, including evidence of a prior offense and an overt act.
• Mahlandt v. Wild Canid Survival & Research Ctr., Inc.
  588 F.2d 626· 8th Cir.· 1978-12-11 ·cited 30×
  Statements made by an agent or employee concerning a matter within the scope of their employment are admissible against the principal or employer under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(D), even if not based on personal knowledge.
• United States v. D'Alora
  585 F.2d 16· 1st Cir.· 1978-10-05 ·cited 30×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The court held that the admission of marked money from a prior drug transaction was proper under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) and 403, and that the denial of a mistrial and the rejection of the jury panel challenge were also correct.
• Contemporary Mission, Inc. v. Famous Music Corp.
  557 F.2d 918· 2d Cir.· 1977-05-18 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the notice provided did not comply with the contract's thirty-day cure period, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding certain evidence.
• Stewart v. United States
  275 F.2d 617· D.C. Cir.· 1960-02-16 ·cited 30×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The court held that evidence of the defendant's mental condition after the crime is admissible if the defendant's demeanor at trial puts his mental state in issue, and that the doctrine of diminished responsibility, allowing for reduced homicide degrees based on low intelligence,
• United States v. Matthews
  431 F.3d 1296· 11th Cir.· 2005-12-06 ·cited 29×·via Undue Prejudice
  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
• State v. Diamond
  553 So. 2d 1185· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-12-28 ·cited 29×
  The State of Florida petitioned for certiorari to review a trial court order conditioning the prosecution of sexual battery charges on the complainant child witnesses' voluntary consent to physical examination by the defendant's gynecologist. The appellate court upheld the trial
• Hodges v. State
  403 So. 2d 1375· Fla. 5th DCA· 1981-09-30 ·cited 29×·via Undue Prejudice
  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
• City OF Orlando v. Pineiro
  66 So. 3d 1064· Fla. 5th DCA· 2011-08-05 ·cited 28×
  The City of Orlando appeals a wrongful death verdict finding it 55% responsible for a young man's death caused by a police pursuit. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial based primarily on improper closing arguments by plaintiff's counsel, including inflammato
• United States v. Anderson
  933 F.2d 1261· 5th Cir.· 1991-06-07 ·cited 28×·via Undue Prejudice
  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. Skillman
  922 F.2d 1370· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-14 ·cited 28×
  The court affirmed the conviction but remanded for reconsideration of the sentence, finding the district court erred in granting a reduction for acceptance of responsibility.
• McKinley Dudley v. Duckworth
  854 F.2d 967· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-08 ·cited 28×
  The admission of testimony regarding anonymous threats against a witness, without any evidence linking the defendant to the threats, was of such magnitude that it denied the petitioner fundamental fairness and violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights.
• United States v. Currier
  836 F.2d 11· 1st Cir.· 1987-12-10 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the documents presented did not trigger the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act and that the tape recording was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 403.
• United States v. Arnoldo Moreno-Hinojosa
  804 F.2d 845· 5th Cir.· 1986-11-07 ·cited 28×
  The court held that while prior convictions were admissible, the evidence was insufficient to prove knowing possession of marijuana with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Moore
  791 F.2d 566· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-23 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the admission of a deceased witness's excited utterance and a bid tabulation sheet as a business record were not abuses of discretion, and that the cross-examination and juror excusal were proper.
• McINNIS v. A.M.F., Inc.
  765 F.2d 240· 1st Cir.· 1985-06-13 ·cited 28×
  The court held that admitting evidence of a plaintiff's settlement with a third-party tortfeasor to prove causation was error under Federal Rule of Evidence 408, requiring a new trial.
• United States v. Herminio Hernandez
  750 F.2d 1256· 5th Cir.· 1985-01-03 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the admission of inadmissible hearsay testimony, which was then emphasized in closing arguments, denied the defendant a fair trial, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Wilson
  732 F.2d 404· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-04 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, or procedural decisions, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict.
• United States v. Smith
  727 F.2d 214· 2d Cir.· 1984-01-26 ·cited 28×
  A defendant can be convicted of aiding and abetting a crime even if not explicitly charged in the indictment, provided the government gives notice and evidence supports the theory. Similar act evidence was properly admitted for intent and plan, and any error in admitting extrinsi
• United States v. Lebovitz
  669 F.2d 894· 3d Cir.· 1982-01-21 ·cited 28×
  The court held that while the trial judge's exercise of discretion under Rule 403 was proper, the record should explicitly reflect the balancing of probative value against prejudice.
• Excel Handbag Co., Inc. v. Edison Bros. Stores, Inc.
  630 F.2d 379· 5th Cir.· 1980-11-14 ·cited 28×
  The court held that sufficient evidence existed to allow a jury to consider punitive damages for the conversion of goods, but that the evidence was insufficient to support a commercial bribery defense or an antitrust counterclaim based on bribery.
• Taenzler v. Burlington Northern
  608 F.2d 796· 8th Cir.· 1979-12-19 ·cited 28×·via Prejudicial Impact
  The court held that expert testimony on future wage increases is admissible in FELA cases, even if it indirectly considers inflation, as long as it is not overly speculative and the jury is properly instructed on present value.
• United States v. Back
  588 F.2d 1283· 9th Cir.· 1979-01-04 ·cited 28×
  The dissenting judge holds that the testimony regarding the rape was properly admitted as part of the sequence of events for the charged offense and was not offered to prove character.
• United States v. Nichols
  534 F.2d 202· 9th Cir.· 1976-04-13 ·cited 28×·via Undue Prejudice
  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×·via Undue Prejudice
  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×·via Undue Prejudice
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to prove the appellant knew he was dealing with a conspiracy to defraud insurance companies.
• Dontae Morris v. State
  219 So. 3d 33· Fla.· 2017-04-27 ·cited 27×
  Dontae Morris appeals his convictions and death sentences for the first-degree premeditated murders of two law enforcement officers shot during a traffic stop. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convictions and sentences, rejecting multiple trial errors and finding the eviden
• United States v. Hopkins
  916 F.2d 207· 5th Cir.· 1990-10-19 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendants' convictions for conspiracy, concealment, misapplication, and false entries, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance or admitting evidence of a prior bad act.
• United States v. Delgado
  903 F.2d 1495· 11th Cir.· 1990-06-25 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the drug trafficking convictions but vacated the sentences in part, remanding for re-sentencing due to errors in imposing supervised release terms for offenses committed before November 1, 1987.
• United States v. Blankenship
  775 F.2d 735· 6th Cir.· 1985-10-25 ·cited 27×
  Evidence of other crimes is admissible to prove predisposition to commit similar crimes for profit, even if not highly similar, as long as prejudice does not substantially outweigh probative value.
• United States v. Ranney
  719 F.2d 1183· 1st Cir.· 1983-10-19 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding that the defendants' objections regarding collateral estoppel, hypothetical questions, Brady violations, and prosecutorial misconduct were unpersuasive.
• Smith v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.
  633 F.2d 401· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-22 ·cited 27×·via Undue Prejudice
  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. Potter
  616 F.2d 384· 9th Cir.· 1979-12-28 ·cited 27×
  The court held that evidence of sexual conduct with patients was admissible to prove motive and lack of good faith, and that prosecutorial improprieties in closing arguments did not constitute reversible error.