Witness Competency

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

• Shuler v. Louie L. Wainwright
  491 F.2d 1213· 5th Cir.· 1974-03-27 ·cited 33×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting habeas corpus relief based on the alleged faking of footprint casts, as the state court's findings were supported by substantial evidence. The court also found that the failure to voluntarily disclose the victim's statement
• Robinson v. Dibble's Administrator
  17 Fla. 457· Fla.· 1880-01-01 ·cited 33×
  In this contract dispute, the Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment for the plaintiff-administrator in an assumpsit action concerning goods allegedly sold on commission. The court held that the defendant was improperly excluded from testifying about account book entries in hi
• United States v. Soc'y OF Indep. Gasoline Marketers OF Am.
  624 F.2d 461· 4th Cir.· 1979-12-26 ·cited 32×
  The court did not explicitly state a holding in this concurring opinion, but implied agreement with the majority's decision.
• Firemen's Mut. Ins. Co. v. Aponaug MFG. Co., Inc.
  149 F.2d 359· 5th Cir.· 1945-05-11 ·cited 32×
  Summary judgment was improperly granted because genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the alleged fraudulent burning of the mill and concealment of the fraud.
• Fields v. Fields
  140 Fla. 269· Fla.· 1939-10-17 ·cited 32×
  An administratrix of a deceased's estate appeals a directed verdict awarding $1,200 to the deceased's former wife on a promissory note executed in settlement of alimony and property rights. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that a note given in lieu of alimony is enforc
• Shiflett v. Commonwealth OF Va.
  447 F.2d 50· 4th Cir.· 1971-06-24 ·cited 31×
  The judge, initially concurring with the panel majority, now joins the en banc opinion, agreeing with prospective application of the decision.
• Sinclair v. Louie L. Wainwright and Jim Smith
  814 F.2d 1516· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-20 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a magistrate had the authority to grant summary judgment under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and that the petitioner failed to establish ineffective assistance of counsel on most grounds. However, the court remanded for a determination of a witness's competency to testif
• United States v. Eschweiler
  745 F.2d 435· 7th Cir.· 1984-09-21 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the admission of recordings made by an informant, the denial of a psychiatric examination for the informant, and the seizure of a safe-deposit box key were all lawful.
• United States v. Verne Allen Lyon
  567 F.2d 777· 8th Cir.· 1977-12-09 ·cited 30×
  The court held that evidence seized under a search warrant must be suppressed because the affidavit supporting the warrant failed to establish probable cause. The court affirmed the bail jumping conviction.
• United States v. Greenberg
  419 F.2d 808· 3d Cir.· 1969-12-30 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a second continuance, nor did it err in admitting testimony or limiting cross-examination.
• Emmitt Monroe Spencer v. Wainwright
  403 F.2d 778· 5th Cir.· 1968-11-22 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the federal district court erred in denying the petition for habeas corpus because the petitioner had not exhausted his available state remedies.
• Jamaica Time Petroleum, Inc. v. Fed. Ins. Co.
  366 F.2d 156· 10th Cir.· 1966-09-07 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting the testimony of a witness who received a reward and in denying the insured's motion for a directed verdict.
• RAY v. United States
  197 F.2d 268· 8th Cir.· 1952-06-18 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing the defendant's motion to vacate his sentence, as the record did not conclusively show entitlement to relief.
• Sharp v. United States
  195 F.2d 997· 6th Cir.· 1952-04-17 ·cited 30×
  The court held that there was substantial evidence to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motions for acquittal, new trial, severance, or mistrial.
• I.T. v. State
  796 So. 2d 1220· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-10-10 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the owner of a vehicle is competent to testify to the value of stolen property within it, but only if they have personal knowledge of the property's value.
• United States v. Sunrhodes
  831 F.2d 1537· 10th Cir.· 1987-10-20 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the full demands of the Confrontation Clause do not apply to restitution proceedings under the Victim and Witness Protection Act, and that the admission of telephone testimony and the order of restitution to the Indian Health Service were proper.
• United States v. Harald Olav Nyman
  649 F.2d 208· 4th Cir.· 1980-10-17 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to allow the testimony of a law clerk/investigator for the purpose of impeaching government witnesses, and this error was prejudicial.
• United States v. Jones
  482 F.2d 747· D.C. Cir.· 1973-07-16 ·cited 28×
• Ry. Express Agency, Inc. v. Brabham (two cases)
  62 So. 2d 713· Fla.· 1952-12-02 ·cited 28×
  A railway express truck ran over a cardboard box in which two young boys were playing, killing one child and injuring another. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed judgments against the Railway Express Agency in the personal injury cases while reversing the trial court's grant of a
• Shambow v. Shambow
  149 Fla. 278· Fla.· 1942-01-09 ·cited 28×
  This Florida Supreme Court case addresses the procedural requirements for an administrator's personal claim against the estate they administer. The court held that an administrator's claim must be proven by competent evidence and cannot be automatically allowed merely because no
• Chapin v. Mitchell
  44 Fla. 225· Fla.· 1902-01-01 ·cited 28×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a judgment for services rendered to a deceased person, holding that the trial court improperly admitted testimony from an interested party about transactions with the deceased in violation of statutory restrictions on witness competency.
• Robinson v. State
  438 So. 2d 8· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-03-09 ·cited 27×
  Donald Ray Robinson appeals his second-degree murder conviction, arguing the trial court erred by refusing to question jurors about exposure to prejudicial newspaper articles published after jury selection and by improperly limiting cross-examination of a key prosecution witness.
• Mills v. United States
  281 F.2d 736· 4th Cir.· 1960-08-19 ·cited 27×
  The court held that a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence must be filed within the time limits prescribed by Rule 33, and the court cannot enlarge this time except as provided by the rule. Additionally, a wife cannot be compelled to testify against her husba
• Seeba v. Bowden
  86 So. 2d 432· Fla.· 1956-03-28 ·cited 27×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed an order granting a new trial in an ejectment action, holding that the trial court properly excluded testimony from Harold Seeba under the Dead Man's Statute because he was a party defendant with direct financial interest in the suit's outcome,
• Rance v. Hutchinson
  131 Fla. 460· Fla.· 1938-02-14 ·cited 27×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's dismissal of an equitable suit by judgment creditors to subject property to satisfaction of a 1916 judgment, finding that the wife's testimony regarding confidential communications with her deceased husband was properly excluded,
• Woodfin v. State
  553 So. 2d 1355· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-12-20 ·cited 26×
  The court held that while the trial court did not strictly adhere to all statutory requirements regarding out-of-court statements by child victims and the unsworn testimony of a young child, any errors were harmless due to overwhelming evidence of guilt, and the admission of coll
• Rutledge v. State
  374 So. 2d 975· Fla.· 1979-07-26 ·cited 26×
  Jesse Raymond Rutledge was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder and two counts of assault with intent to commit murder for a brutal stabbing attack on the Williams family. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and death sentences, finding no reversible erro
• United States v. Beacher Drell Roach
  590 F.2d 181· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-26 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the absence of counsel and a transcript at a preliminary hearing requires a remand to determine prejudice, and vacated a conviction based on Supreme Court precedent regarding multiple punishments for the same offense.
• United States v. Hardin
  443 F.2d 735· D.C. Cir.· 1970-12-22 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a defective jury instruction on manslaughter constitutes plain error requiring reversal.
• Courtney v. United States
  390 F.2d 521· 9th Cir.· 1968-03-01 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the admission of certain testimony was prejudicial error, requiring reversal of the Mann Act convictions. The court also considered the obstruction of justice conviction separately.
• Schoppel v. United States
  270 F.2d 413· 4th Cir.· 1959-09-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient for the jury, convicted felons are competent witnesses, and allowing an investigating officer to testify while other witnesses were excluded was not an abuse of discretion. The prosecutor's improper bolstering of witnesses was harml
• Hunter v. State
  29 So. 3d 256· Fla.· 2008-09-25 ·cited 24×
  James Eugene Hunter, a death row inmate, appealed the circuit court's denial of his successive Rule 3.851 postconviction motion raising claims of newly discovered evidence, Brady/Giglio violations, and ineffective assistance of counsel. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the tria
• United States v. David O'Malley & Robert Salerno
  796 F.2d 891· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-09 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the jury instructions were proper, evidence was sufficient, and co-conspirator statements were admissible, affirming the convictions.
• United States v. Wilson
  601 F.2d 95· 3d Cir.· 1979-06-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the denial of a deposition for a witness who was a fugitive was an error, especially when combined with doubts about the credibility of a key prosecution witness, warranting a new trial.
• United States v. Seymour Matanky, M.D.
  482 F.2d 1319· 9th Cir.· 1973-07-05 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the submission of false Medicare claims to private carriers acting as government agents falls within the purview of 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and that the indictment and evidence were sufficient to support the conviction.
• Singleton v. United States
  381 F.2d 1· 9th Cir.· 1967-07-28 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or procedural decisions.
• Doane v. State
  847 So. 2d 1015· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-05-02 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the State failed to prove the stolen items had a market value of $300 or more, which is essential for a grand theft conviction.
• Anderson v. State
  655 So. 2d 1118· Fla.· 1995-05-25 ·cited 23×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for lewd and lascivious assault where the sole evidence was uncorroborated hearsay statements from an incompetent child witness, with no judicial determination of the hearsay's reliability. The court held that such evidence is const
• GAY v. State
  607 So. 2d 454· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-09-25 ·cited 23×
  John Davenport Gay was convicted of multiple sex offenses against grammar school children, including lewd and lascivious acts, sexual battery, and kidnapping. On appeal, Gay challenged the denial of his motions to suppress evidence, for judgment of acquittal on certain counts, an
• United States v. Tucker
  773 F.2d 136· 7th Cir.· 1985-09-06 ·cited 23×
  The court held that a letter of credit is within the scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1014, and that the evidence was sufficient to convict all defendants, with no reversible error found in the trial proceedings.
• United States v. McRARY
  616 F.2d 181· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-30 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the exclusion of testimony regarding the defendant's alleged folie á deux defense and the exclusion of his wife's testimony was improper, requiring reversal.
• Lennie Elizabeth Pate v. Mellen
  275 So. 2d 562· Fla. 1st DCA· 1972-12-12 ·cited 23×
  Pate appealed a judgment against her in an estate matter involving allegedly forged instruments. The trial court abused its discretion by refusing to admit checks as handwriting exemplars despite unrebutted eyewitness testimony that the estate beneficiary signed them, though the
• United States v. Looper
  419 F.2d 1405· 4th Cir.· 1969-12-12 ·cited 23×
  A defendant's right to testify cannot be denied solely because their religious beliefs prevent them from taking the oath or affirmation in the prescribed form.
• Matthews v. Olive M. Matthews & Soft Water Laundry, Inc.
  177 So. 2d 497· Fla. 2d DCA· 1965-07-09 ·cited 23×
  An estate administrator sued to recover shares of corporate stock allegedly fraudulently transferred by a controlling shareholder after the decedent's death. The trial court dismissed after finding insufficient evidence of fraud and that the claim was barred by laches. The appell
• Johnston v. Thomas
  93 Fla. 67· Fla.· 1927-01-19 ·cited 23×
  This case addresses the liability of Robert E. Thomas as an executor de son tort (an unauthorized intermeddler in a deceased person's estate) for assets he received before and after John Johnston's death in March 1920. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the lower court's decree,
• Martins v. PNC Bank
  170 So. 3d 932· Fla. 5th DCA· 2015-07-31 ·cited 22×
  Borrowers Margaret and James Martins appealed a summary judgment in a mortgage foreclosure action brought by PNC Bank. The Florida appellate court reversed, holding that material factual disputes existed regarding PNC Bank's compliance with mortgage notice requirements, discovery
• Amos v. The State OF Minn. & the Attorney Gen. of the State of Minn.
  849 F.2d 1070· 8th Cir.· 1988-06-14 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the habeas corpus petition, finding no constitutional error in the state court proceedings.
• United States v. Gutman
  725 F.2d 417· 7th Cir.· 1984-01-10 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the conviction, finding that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the defendant's motions for a competency hearing, a psychiatric examination of a key government witness, and to strike the witness's testimony. The dissent argues that
• Cruz v. State
  437 So. 2d 692· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-04-14 ·cited 22×
  Cruz appeals his convictions for conspiracy to commit robbery with a firearm and robbery with a firearm. The appellate court reverses and remands for a new trial, finding that the trial court unduly restricted Cruz's right to cross-examine the state's key witness regarding drug u
• United States v. McFARLAND
  371 F.2d 701· 2d Cir.· 1966-12-29 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the dismissed counts did not render the remaining perjury charges immaterial and that the prosecution's delayed disclosure of a witness's psychiatric history did not prejudice the defendant.