Witness Bias

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

• United States v. Diecidue
  603 F.2d 535· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-01 ·cited 226×
  A RICO conspiracy indictment adequately alleges an essential element when it charges defendants with willfully and knowingly conspiring to violate 18 U.S.C.A. § 1962(c) and describes the nature of the racketeering activities composing the alleged pattern. The definition of 'enter
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Boecher
  733 So. 2d 993· Fla.· 1999-04-22 ·cited 185×
  Allstate Insurance Company challenges a discovery order requiring it to disclose information about its financial relationship with expert witness Biodynamics Research Corporation. The Florida Supreme Court holds that parties may be required to disclose the extent of their relatio
• United States v. Onori
  535 F.2d 938· 5th Cir.· 1976-07-26 ·cited 175×
  The court held that the trial court's actions regarding judicial comments, admission of 'other crimes' evidence, limitations on cross-examination, and use of transcripts did not constitute reversible error.
• Morrison v. State
  818 So. 2d 432· Fla.· 2002-03-21 ·cited 169×
  Raymond Morrison was convicted of first-degree murder in the January 1997 death of 82-year-old Albert Dwelle during a robbery. Morrison's death sentence was upheld on appeal after the Florida Supreme Court rejected all challenges to his conviction and penalty phase, including cla
• United States v. Honneus
  508 F.2d 566· 1st Cir.· 1974-12-24 ·cited 150×
  The court held that multiple conspiracy counts stemming from a single agreement are impermissible, and a defendant can only be sentenced for one conspiracy, even if it violates multiple statutes. The court also found that the exclusion of certain cross-examination testimony was h
• Hansbrough v. State
  509 So. 2d 1081· Fla.· 1987-06-18 ·cited 140×
  Kirk Hansbrough was convicted of first-degree murder and armed robbery for stabbing an insurance agency employee over thirty times during a robbery. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions but vacated his death sentence, finding insufficient aggravating circumstances t
• Ewing v. United States
  135 F.2d 633· D.C. Cir.· 1942-12-01 ·cited 124×
  The court held that while testimony regarding a witness's opinion of the defendant's guilt is generally inadmissible, it was not reversible error in this case because it was admitted without objection.
• United States v. Nuccio
  373 F.2d 168· 2d Cir.· 1967-01-05 ·cited 118×
  The court held that while the refusal to allow cross-examination regarding homosexual advances was an error, it was harmless. The court also rejected claims regarding the sufficiency of evidence for a single conspiracy, the use of prior inconsistent statements, jury instructions
• United States v. Irie E. Leonard
  494 F.2d 955· D.C. Cir.· 1974-01-31 ·cited 109×
  The court held that the district court committed reversible error by refusing to instruct the jury to scrutinize the testimony of witnesses granted immunity and by limiting cross-examination regarding pending felony charges against a witness. It also held that the failure to prov
• McArthur Breedlove v. State
  580 So. 2d 605· Fla.· 1991-05-09 ·cited 108×
  McArthur Breedlove, convicted of murder and sentenced to death, appealed the denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion claiming Brady v. Maryland violations based on the prosecution's alleged failure to disclose evidence of detectives' criminal activities and investigations.
• Bracey v. United States
  142 F.2d 85· D.C. Cir.· 1944-03-31 ·cited 101×
  The court held that evidence of another offense was admissible because the defense attorney's opening statement raised the issue of a conspiracy to frame the defendant, and the prosecution's rebuttal testimony was necessary to explain the witness's bias.
• United States v. Beekman
  155 F.2d 580· 2d Cir.· 1946-04-26 ·cited 100×
  The court held that OPA records concerning potential witness bias were improperly withheld, requiring reversal of convictions based on that testimony. It also held that comments on the failure to call certain witnesses were permissible.
• United States v. Amabile
  395 F.2d 47· 7th Cir.· 1968-04-26 ·cited 94×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for violating the Hobbs Act was supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in restricting cross-examination or denying disclosure of grand jury testimony.
• Collins v. Wayne Corp.
  621 F.2d 777· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-18 ·cited 89×
  The court held that the district court erred in refusing to allow the plaintiffs to offer an expert's deposition as an admission of the defendant, but this error was harmless. The court also held that the district court did not err in allowing cross-examination of the plaintiffs'
• Tanzi v. State
  964 So. 2d 106· Fla.· 2007-05-10 ·cited 88×
  Michael Tanzi was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for kidnapping, robbing, sexually assaulting, and strangling Janet Acosta in April 2000. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and death sentence, rejecting six appellate claims including challe
• United States v. Wood
  550 F.2d 435· 9th Cir.· 1976-12-23 ·cited 88×
  The court held that a fugitive's appeal is subject to dismissal and that various evidentiary and procedural rulings by the trial court did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Tarantino
  846 F.2d 1384· D.C. Cir.· 1988-04-12 ·cited 82×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish a single chain conspiracy for distributing cocaine and laundering its proceeds, and that the appellants' actions were in furtherance of this overarching objective. The court affirmed convictions except for one sentencin
• United States v. Houlihan
  332 F.2d 8· 2d Cir.· 1964-05-19 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in excusing a juror in the absence of counsel due to an emergency, nor was there a fatal variance or insufficient evidence to support the convictions.
• Hitchcock v. State
  578 So. 2d 685· Fla.· 1990-12-20 ·cited 79×
  Hitchcock was convicted of first-degree murder in 1977 and sentenced to death. The U.S. Supreme Court vacated his sentence in 1987 for failing to consider nonstatutory mitigating evidence, as required by Lockett v. Ohio and related precedent. On resentencing, the trial court agai
• United States v. Musgrave
  483 F.2d 327· 5th Cir.· 1973-06-29 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its rulings and instructions, affirming the convictions.
• Villaroman v. United States
  184 F.2d 261· D.C. Cir.· 1950-07-24 ·cited 78×
  The court held that refusing to allow cross-examination about a pending civil suit by the complaining witness was prejudicial error, and that a requested jury instruction on good character evidence should have been given.
• United States v. Tracey
  675 F.2d 433· 1st Cir.· 1982-04-15 ·cited 77×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in excluding evidence of a witness's jail incident and municipal court records, and that the denial of a new trial based on newly discovered evidence was proper.
• United States v. Corbin
  734 F.2d 643· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-18 ·cited 71×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that their procedural objections lacked merit.
• Sias v. State
  416 So. 2d 1213· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-07-20 ·cited 69×
  Sias appeals his conviction for sexual battery on a minor, challenging the admission of evidence regarding a similar uncharged crime and testimony about his homosexuality. The court affirmed the conviction, finding the similar crime evidence admissible under a stringent test requ
• Stripling v. State
  349 So. 2d 187· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-07-12 ·cited 68×
  Two criminal defendants, Spiegel (an attorney) and Stripling, were convicted of bribery and conspiracy to commit bribery. The court reversed and remanded due to multiple trial errors, including erroneous entrapment instructions that confused the jury, improper denial of cross-exa
• Pantoja v. State
  59 So. 3d 1092· Fla.· 2011-03-03 ·cited 66×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the exclusion of evidence that a child sexual abuse victim had previously made a false accusation of molestation against her uncle, resolving a conflict between district courts regarding whether prior false accusations are admissible to impeach wi
• United States v. Mohinder Singh
  628 F.2d 758· 2d Cir.· 1980-06-12 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding a civil suit against a defendant was permissible to show witness bias, and that curtailment of cross-examination was proper when the jury had sufficient information to assess witness credibility.
• United States v. RAY
  731 F.2d 1361· 9th Cir.· 1984-04-24 ·cited 64×
• Surrett v. United States
  421 F.2d 403· 5th Cir.· 1970-01-26 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendants' convictions for various federal alcohol tax violations, and that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence for impeachment purposes.
• Gibson v. State
  661 So. 2d 288· Fla.· 1995-10-05 ·cited 61×
  Brian Keith Gibson was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for the 1991 murder of Lupita Luevano. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Gibson's convictions but vacated his death sentence and remanded for resentencing because the trial court failed to enter writt
• Lewis v. State
  591 So. 2d 922· Fla.· 1991-12-05 ·cited 61×
  Lewis was convicted of lewd and lascivious assault and sexual activity with a child. The Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding that the trial court violated Lewis's Sixth Amendment confrontation rights by excluding evidence of the victim's prior sexual activity with a third par
• United States v. Adegboyega Akitoye
  923 F.2d 221· 1st Cir.· 1991-01-10 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its rulings on cross-examination, jury read-back requests, or sentencing enhancements.
• United States v. Jarabek
  726 F.2d 889· 1st Cir.· 1984-02-01 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the tape recordings were admissible because the investigation was a joint federal-state effort and federal law governed admissibility, not the stricter state wiretap statute.
• United States v. Shafter W. Summers
  598 F.2d 450· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-09 ·cited 59×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish an effect on interstate commerce for Hobbs Act jurisdiction and that the limitations on cross-examination did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights.
• Travis v. United States
  269 F.2d 928· 10th Cir.· 1959-08-03 ·cited 58×
  The court should have examined grand jury testimony in camera to determine if disclosure was warranted.
• United States v. Williams
  892 F.2d 296· 3d Cir.· 1989-12-26 ·cited 57×
  The court held that while the trial court erred in prohibiting cross-examination of a witness regarding a prior conviction to show bias, this error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and the exclusion of expert testimony on blackout was proper for a general intent crime.
• Greene v. Louis Wainwright & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Fla.
  634 F.2d 272· 5th Cir.· 1981-01-15 ·cited 57×
  The court held that prohibiting cross-examination into a key witness's potential bias or mental instability violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation.
• United States v. Fortna
  796 F.2d 724· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-05 ·cited 54×
  The court affirmed convictions for Fortna, Sharer, and Reo, but remanded Harnage's appeal for a supplemental hearing regarding his attorney-client privilege claim.
• United States v. Freeman
  514 F.2d 1184· 10th Cir.· 1975-04-28 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction, prior wrongful acts testimony was admissible, unsigned letters were properly admitted, hearsay statements fell under exceptions, witness conclusions were permissible, and the trial court did not err in lim
• United States v. Sidman
  470 F.2d 1158· 9th Cir.· 1972-10-16 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its evidentiary rulings or procedural decisions, including the use of multiple juries.
• United States v. Keys
  899 F.2d 983· 10th Cir.· 1990-03-30 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of the defendant's gang membership to show witness bias due to fear, nor in rereading testimony, enhancing the sentence for obstruction of justice, or departing upward from the Sentencing Guidelines based on
• Rogers v. State
  782 So. 2d 373· Fla.· 2001-02-15 ·cited 51×
  Jerry Layne Rogers was convicted of murder largely based on testimony from codefendant Thomas McDermid. The Florida Supreme Court reversed Rogers' conviction because the State violated Brady v. Maryland by suppressing material evidence including McDermid's second confession, poli
• United States v. Hyman Abrams
  427 F.2d 86· 2d Cir.· 1970-06-03 ·cited 50×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no merit in the appellant's contentions regarding the exercise of his privilege against self-incrimination, cross-examination of a witness, jury instructions, sufficiency of evidence, or due process.
• Marr v. State
  494 So. 2d 1139· Fla.· 1986-09-25 ·cited 48×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that trial courts should not give jury instructions singling out sexual battery victims' testimony for heightened scrutiny. The court rejected the historical "Lord Hale" instruction and held that standard jury instructions adequately guide juries in
• United States v. Swingler
  758 F.2d 477· 10th Cir.· 1985-03-20 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the warrantless arrests of defendants Vicory, Houser, and Jahnke were supported by sufficient probable cause based on the totality of the circumstances and corroborating information.
• United States v. McCLAIN
  545 F.2d 988· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-24 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that Mexico had declared ownership of all pre-Columbian artifacts since 1897, as this declaration was not made until 1972. Therefore, the illegal exportation of artifacts prior to 1972 could not be considered 'stol
• United States v. Blackwood
  456 F.2d 526· 2d Cir.· 1972-03-01 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse her discretion in denying the motion to suppress evidence as untimely and in limiting the scope of cross-examination regarding a key government witness's prior inconsistent statements, as the jury was otherwise sufficiently inform
• Webb v. State
  336 So. 2d 416· Fla. 2d DCA· 1976-07-30 ·cited 47×
  Jerry Webb was convicted of marijuana sale based on undercover officer Carnahan's testimony. The court reversed, holding that Webb was improperly prevented from presenting evidence of police bias stemming from a prior civil suit, and that the trial court erred in denying his moti
• Gold, Vann & White, P.A. v. DeBERRY
  639 So. 2d 47· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-04-27 ·cited 46×
  In this medical malpractice case arising from a birth injury, the appellate court reversed and remanded for new trial due to erroneous admission of inflammatory settlement agreement language, improper jury evidence, and evidentiary errors, though it affirmed the directed verdict
• United States v. Heriberto Diaz
  876 F.2d 1344· 7th Cir.· 1989-06-09 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in limiting cross-examination of a government informant, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions.