Witness Bias

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

• Traffanstead v. State
  290 So. 3d 985· Fla. 1st DCA· 2019-12-31 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court reversed a conviction for sexual battery and lewd molestation, holding that the trial court violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel by prohibiting defense counsel from using a victim's psychological assessments. These assessments were deemed
• Brock D. Mardis v. State
  122 So. 3d 950· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-10-09 ·cited 4×
  Mardis appeals his sexual battery conviction, challenging the trial court's exclusion of evidence that the victim had financial motivations to fabricate the charges. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that evidence of the victim's a
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. German
  12 So. 3d 1286· Fla. 5th DCA· 2009-07-24 ·cited 4×
  Discovery regarding potential bias of a treating physician is permissible, even if they are not considered an 'expert witness' under the rule.
• Saleeby v. Rocky Elson Constr., Inc.
  965 So. 2d 211· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-09-05 ·cited 4×
  Albert Saleeby, a temporary laborer supplied by Labor for Hire to Rocky Elson Construction, was injured when trusses collapsed at a construction site. The court affirmed that Saleeby was a 'borrowed employee' under Florida's Workers' Compensation Act and therefore barred from sui
• Stites v. State
  841 So. 2d 681· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-04-11 ·cited 4×
  Peter Stites appealed a denial of postconviction relief based on alleged ineffective assistance of trial counsel. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's dismissal of two ineffective assistance claims but reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on a third claim re
• United States v. Eloy Horacio DeSOTO
  950 F.2d 626· 10th Cir.· 1991-11-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred by limiting cross-examination regarding a witness's potential bias, violating the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation, and that this error was not harmless.
• Fannin v. State
  581 So. 2d 974· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-06-21 ·cited 4×
  Harold Fannin was convicted of cocaine possession based largely on testimony from his co-defendant Gwen Oliver. The Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court improperly restricted Fannin's cross-examination of Olive
• Hernandez v. Honorable William R. Ptomey, Jr.
  549 So. 2d 757· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-10-03 ·cited 4×
  Alex Hernandez was charged with battery and resisting arrest. During trial, when defense counsel attempted to cross-examine the arresting officer about an internal review investigation that could lead to criminal charges, the judge declared a mistrial without any party requesting
• Francis v. Dugger
  697 F. Supp. 472· S.D. Fla.· 1988-10-07 ·cited 4×
  The court denied Bobby Marion Francis's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding that any constitutional errors were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Gregory
  808 F.2d 679· 8th Cir.· 1987-01-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that limiting cross-examination on a witness's shoelaces was not a violation of confrontation rights and any error was harmless, and that informing the jury of the number of prior felony convictions was not error.
• State v. Eshuk
  347 So. 2d 704· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-06-14 ·cited 4×
  Florida appealed the dismissal of drug charges against Stanley Eshuk for sale and possession of cannabis. The trial court dismissed based on alleged governmental misconduct involving use of an informant with a criminal background. The appellate court reversed, holding that using
• Saviano v. State
  287 So. 2d 102· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-12-21 ·cited 4×
  Saviano was convicted of multiple counts of unlawful sale and possession of heroin. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the trial court committed harmful error by conditioning the defendant's entrapment defense testimony on his c
• United States v. Reed
  437 F.2d 57· 2d Cir.· 1971-01-12 ·cited 4×
• Cali v. State
  111 So. 2d 703· Fla. 2d DCA· 1959-03-06 ·cited 4×
  Angelo Cali was convicted of unlawfully aiding and assisting in conducting a lottery operation known as Bolita and Bond. On appeal to the Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District, Cali challenged the trial court's evidentiary rulings and sufficiency of evidence, but the
• Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Chadwell
  306 So. 3d 174· Fla. 3d DCA· 2020-06-03 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court affirmed a jury verdict for the plaintiff in an Engle-progeny tobacco lawsuit. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination regarding a prior asbestos claim and that the jury instructions on fraudulent concealm
• Becker v. State
  110 So. 3d 473· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-03-06 ·cited 3×
  Todd Becker appeals his conviction for solicitation to commit home invasion robbery. The Florida appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the prosecutor improperly vouched for the credibility of the state's key informant witness by personally assuring t
• Lloyd v. State
  909 So. 2d 580· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-09-02 ·cited 3×
  Judith Lloyd was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon following a jury trial. The appellate court reversed and remanded because the trial court improperly excluded evidence that could have demonstrated bias on the part of a key witness, violating the defendant's right to imp
• Mamerto Izquierdo v. State
  890 So. 2d 1263· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-01-21 ·cited 3×
  Mamerto Izquierdo appeals his convictions for aggravated assault and misdemeanor battery following a jury trial. The appellate court reverses the misdemeanor battery conviction due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as the misdemeanor did not arise from the same circumstance
• Cipriano v. State
  883 So. 2d 363· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-09-29 ·cited 3×
  Keith Cipriano appeals the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion challenging his conviction for solicitation to commit first degree murder. The court reverses in part and remands, finding that Cipriano stated legally sufficient claims of ineffective assistance of
• Martin v. State
  797 So. 2d 6· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-05-16 ·cited 3×
  Brandon Troy Martin was convicted of burglary of a dwelling. On appeal, Martin challenged the state's cross-examination questions about gang membership, but the court affirmed, finding the questions properly addressed witness bias and credibility.
• Matlock v. State
  284 So. 2d 489· Fla. 2d DCA· 1973-09-14 ·cited 3×
  Ronald Matlock was convicted by jury of assault with intent to commit murder in the second degree following a confrontation with Tarpon Springs police officers. He appeals arguing the state improperly injected evidence of narcotic involvement to attack his character and that the
• Merrill v. State
  228 So. 2d 305· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-11-18 ·cited 3×
  Charles Lowell Merrill was convicted of operating a gambling room after a jury trial. On appeal, the Florida District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the trial court committed reversible error by admitting rebuttal testimony from a police chief
• Ingalls Shipbuilding Corp. v. Trehern
  155 F.2d 202· 5th Cir.· 1946-05-08 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in submitting the negligence issue to the jury, in refusing to apply the assumption of risk defense, or in refusing to grant a mistrial after evidence of liability insurance was introduced.
• Fla. Int'l Univ. v. Ramos
  335 So. 3d 1221· Fla. 3d DCA· 2021-10-20 ·cited 2×
  Florida International University sought certiorari review after a circuit court quashed a student disciplinary decision finding academic misconduct. The court held that the student, Samantha Ramos, was denied due process when prohibited from questioning a witness about bias and m
• Guzman v. Sec'y, Dep't OF Corr., Fla. Attorney Gen.
  661 F.3d 602· 11th Cir.· 2011-10-27 ·cited 2×
  James Guzman was convicted of murder and armed robbery based largely on testimony from Martha Cronin, a key state witness, who testified that Guzman confessed to killing David Colvin. Both Cronin and Detective Allison Sylvester testified falsely at trial that Cronin received no b
• Cardenas v. State
  993 So. 2d 546· Fla. 1st DCA· 2008-10-10 ·cited 2×
  Ronald Cardenas appealed a summary denial of his Rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief, challenging ineffective assistance of counsel. The appellate court found several colorable claims of ineffective assistance that were not refuted by the record and reversed the summary d
• Adkins v. State
  963 So. 2d 737· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-06-06 ·cited 2×
  Andre Adkins was convicted of second-degree murder based solely on his friend Carl Glover's eyewitness testimony. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding that the State violated Brady v. Maryland by suppressing evidence of twelve criminal complaints aga
• State v. Bullard
  858 So. 2d 1189· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-11-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting a new trial based on an alleged Brady violation because the withheld evidence was not material, and also erred in granting a new trial on a count to which a plea had already been entered.
• Nieves v. State
  849 So. 2d 435· Fla. 3d DCA· 2003-07-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in limiting cross-examination regarding a witness's probationary status and in excluding defense witness testimony, nor in denying the admission of character evidence.
• Henry v. State
  825 So. 2d 431· Fla. 1st DCA· 2002-06-27 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding evidence of a prior civil suit because it was irrelevant to witness bias or credibility and the issue was not preserved for appeal.
• Phillips v. State
  739 So. 2d 632· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-06-25 ·cited 2×
  Florida appellate court affirmed convictions for false imprisonment, sexual battery, and impersonating a police officer, finding evidentiary errors harmless and noting that restricting cross-examination about victim's probationary status was erroneous but did not affect the verdi
• Scott v. State
  730 So. 2d 732· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-03-03 ·cited 2×
  The trial court erred in excluding evidence of the victim's probationary status, which was relevant to her credibility and potential bias.
• Pompa v. State
  635 So. 2d 114· Fla. 5th DCA· 1994-04-08 ·cited 2×
  Roger Pompa appealed his conviction for grand theft and sentence as a habitual offender. The appellate court affirmed the conviction but vacated the habitual offender sentence due to lack of factual findings and evidentiary support.
• Castillo v. Stainer
  983 F.2d 145· 9th Cir.· 1992-12-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while the trial court erred in failing to follow proper procedures for shackling the defendant, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the restraints were not visible to the jury and did not impede the defendant's ability to communicate with
• United States v. Hudson
  970 F.2d 948· 1st Cir.· 1992-07-22 ·cited 2×
  The court is bound by prior panel precedent (Barrett) despite disagreement with its reasoning regarding impeachment evidence foundation.
• United States v. Coco
  926 F.2d 759· 8th Cir.· 1991-02-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of a co-defendant's taped statements was proper as an admission of a party opponent, and that any Bruton or Bell issues were either waived or not plain error.
• Pierce Assocs., Inc. v. The Nemours Found.
  865 F.2d 530· 3d Cir.· 1988-12-29 ·cited 2×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the owner could be a third-party beneficiary of the subcontract and that the exclusion of expert testimony was an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Smith
  831 F.2d 657· 6th Cir.· 1987-10-21 ·cited 2×
• Perez v. State
  453 So. 2d 173· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-07-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in allowing a witness to assert the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and refuse to answer questions on cross-examination that were essential to attacking the witness's credibility.
• United States v. Withers
  637 F.2d 445· 6th Cir.· 1980-12-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred by refusing to allow cross-examination of the complaining witness regarding a prior misdemeanor marijuana possession conviction, as it was relevant to showing the witness's motive to fabricate the kidnapping charge.
• Azbill v. Pogue
  534 F.2d 195· 9th Cir.· 1976-04-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's counsel's decision not to extensively cross-examine a key witness regarding juvenile offenses, due to trial court restrictions, did not constitute a deliberate bypass of state remedies.
• Branam v. State
  265 So. 2d 555· Fla. 2d DCA· 1972-08-04 ·cited 2×
  Steven Branam was convicted of armed robbery after taking $72 from a store employee at gunpoint and sentenced to 75 years. On appeal, he challenged the admission of photographic identification evidence and the trial court's failure to charge the jury on the lesser included offens
• Heron v. Heron
  393 F.2d 652· 3d Cir.· 1968-04-30 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial judge's jury instructions, even if imperfect, were not erroneous enough to warrant reversal, especially given the de minimis nature of any potential error.
• Eufemio Rosado aka Mike Rosado v. United States
  370 F.2d 542· 9th Cir.· 1966-12-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict and that the appellant was afforded sufficient latitude on cross-examination.
• LEE WAY Motor Freight, Inc. v. True
  165 F.2d 38· 10th Cir.· 1947-11-08 ·cited 2×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the jury's verdict, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings.
• Nickles v. State
  48 Fla. 46· Fla.· 1904-06-01 ·cited 2×
  Walter Nickles was convicted of assault with intent to murder in the Circuit Court of Jackson County in 1903. On writ of error to the Florida Supreme Court, Nickles challenged six rulings, including evidentiary decisions and the form of the verdict, but the Supreme Court found no
• Bellezza v. Menendez
  273 So. 3d 11· Fla. 4th DCA· 2019-05-08 ·cited 1×
  Evidence of a plaintiff's attorney's financial relationship with treating physicians, including payments and letters of protection, is protected by attorney-client privilege and not discoverable or admissible at trial. An attorney cannot be compelled to testify regarding such pri
• Roman v. State
  165 So. 3d 723· Fla. 4th DCA· 2015-05-20 ·cited 1×
  Carlos Roman was convicted of lewd or lascivious molestation of a child and appealed, arguing the trial court erred in excluding testimony from his first wife and son that would have shown the alleged victim's mother had motive and bias to fabricate the allegations. The appellate
• Diamond Regal Dev., Inc. v. Matinnaz Constr., Inc.
  1 So. 3d 1104· Fla. 1st DCA· 2009-01-12 ·cited 1×
  Diamond Regal appeals a jury verdict favoring Matinnaz in a construction contract dispute over Eagle Trace condominium. The appellate court reverses the trial court's exclusion of Diamond Regal's expert witness—a certified building contractor and unsuccessful bidder—from testifyi
• United States v. Lugo
  S.D. Fla.· 2025-06-30
  The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's report, denying the motion to vacate sentence, finding no ineffective assistance of counsel and no substantial showing of a constitutional right denial.