Aiding And Abetting

3,842 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 164 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Heath v. Jones
  863 F.2d 815· 11th Cir.· 1989-01-17 ·cited 362×
  The denial of the appellant's petition for a writ of habeas corpus is affirmed because the magistrate's report and recommendation, adopted by the district court, correctly found that state remedies were exhausted and the claims lacked merit.
• United States v. Varelli
  407 F.2d 735· 7th Cir.· 1969-02-11 ·cited 322×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove a single overall conspiracy, and the defendants were prejudiced by being tried together for multiple conspiracies without proper jury instructions. Therefore, the convictions are voided.
• Tillman v. United States
  406 F.2d 930· 5th Cir.· 1969-01-09 ·cited 299×
  The court held that the trial court's investigation into alleged juror misconduct was adequate, despite a minor date discrepancy in the judge's questioning.
• Gordon v. United States
  438 F.2d 858· 5th Cir.· 1971-01-13 ·cited 283×
• United States v. Bell
  573 F.2d 1040· 8th Cir.· 1978-04-19 ·cited 282×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its voir dire questions, admission of coconspirator statements, or jury instructions, and any errors in admitting testimony about the gun's purpose were harmless.
• Pope v. State
  84 Fla. 428· Fla.· 1922-10-16 ·cited 266×
  John H. Pope was convicted of murder in the first degree as a principal in the second degree for his role in a robbery that resulted in the death of George H. Hickman. Pope appeals, challenging the indictment sufficiency, jury selection procedures, and evidentiary sufficiency. Th
• United States v. Oates
  560 F.2d 45· 2d Cir.· 1977-06-03 ·cited 256×
  The court held that the chemist's report and worksheet were inadmissible hearsay under the Federal Rules of Evidence, requiring reversal and a new trial.
• United States v. Roselli
  432 F.2d 879· 9th Cir.· 1970-09-28 ·cited 253×
  The court held that the scheme to cheat at card games for profit constituted an 'unlawful activity' under 18 U.S.C. § 1952, and that knowledge of interstate travel or facility use is not an essential element for conspiracy or substantive violations of §§ 1952 and 2314.
• United States v. Evans
  572 F.2d 455· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-04 ·cited 234×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy and other offenses, and that the district court did not err in instructing the jury that certain student loan funds were federal property.
• United States v. Polizzi
  500 F.2d 856· 9th Cir.· 1974-04-30 ·cited 232×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the appellants' conduct violated the federal Travel Act by engaging in a business enterprise involving gambling offenses under Nevada law, specifically by failing to disclose hidden interests in a licensed gambling operation to sta
• United States v. Louin Ray Bright
  630 F.2d 804· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-11 ·cited 230×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the pre-trial rulings, trial rulings, jury charge, or closing arguments.
• 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
• United States v. Martino
  648 F.2d 367· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-19 ·cited 217×
  The court held that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) is constitutional and that the indictment, charges, and joint trial were proper. Convictions were sustained.
• United States v. Bozza
  365 F.2d 206· 2d Cir.· 1966-08-01 ·cited 209×
  The majority reverses convictions based on the admission of a co-defendant's confession, finding it prejudiced other defendants despite limiting instructions.
• United States v. Hoffa
  349 F.2d 20· 6th Cir.· 1965-07-29 ·cited 203×·via Aider And Abettor
  The court held that the "suggester system" for jury selection is not per se invalid and that the defendants failed to make a sufficient showing of discrimination to warrant a full investigation into the grand jury's composition. The court also held that the informant's testimony
• United States v. Bascaro
  742 F.2d 1335· 11th Cir.· 1984-10-01 ·cited 192×
  The court held that marijuana offenses can be the subject of a RICO charge and that wiretap applications, even if amended, are valid if probable cause exists independently of challenged information.
• United States v. Garguilo
  310 F.2d 249· 2d Cir.· 1962-10-24 ·cited 190×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence from which a jury could conclude that Macchia was guilty as an aider and abettor.
• Staten v. State
  519 So. 2d 622· Fla.· 1988-02-04 ·cited 189×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a defendant cannot be convicted as both a principal and an accessory after the fact for the same criminal offense, as these statuses involve mutually exclusive intents. The court vacated Staten's convictions for accessory after the fact while a
• United States v. Biasucci
  786 F.2d 504· 2d Cir.· 1986-03-17 ·cited 189×
  The court held that visual electronic surveillance of private premises can be authorized under Rule 41 and 57(b) if it meets constitutional standards, and that RICO does not require proof of specific knowledge of usurious interest rates for conviction.
• Montsdoca v. State
  84 Fla. 82· Fla.· 1922-07-03 ·cited 186×
  Robert Montsdoca and Joe Tracy were convicted of robbery for taking $60 from W.S. Lamacks by force and intimidation. On appeal, they challenged the sufficiency of evidence and jury instructions, but the Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the evidence clearly established
• United States v. Kahn
  381 F.2d 824· 7th Cir.· 1967-06-29 ·cited 185×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the credibility and lying witness instructions were not erroneous, the denial of a mistrial upon a co-defendant's guilty plea was not an abuse of discretion, and the denial of severance was proper.
• United States v. Terence George Kelly
  888 F.2d 732· 11th Cir.· 1989-09-29 ·cited 182×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine and for aiding and abetting such possession, and that the exclusion of testimony regarding the defendant's professional obligations was an abuse of
• Bernardino Chirez Hernandez v. United States
  300 F.2d 114· 9th Cir.· 1962-02-09 ·cited 182×
  A defendant cannot be convicted under 21 U.S.C. § 174 based on the "possession" of a co-conspirator or aider/abettor if the defendant themselves did not have actual or constructive possession or control over the drugs.
• United States v. Twigg
  588 F.2d 373· 3d Cir.· 1978-11-17 ·cited 180×
  The court held that the government's involvement in the drug manufacturing operation, while substantial, did not reach the level of 'outrageousness' required to violate due process, especially given the defendants' predisposition.
• United States v. Taylor
  464 F.2d 240· 2d Cir.· 1972-07-06 ·cited 176×
  The court held that the standard of evidence necessary for a judge to send a case to the jury is not the same in civil and criminal cases, and that the 'Second Circuit rule' requiring a single standard is overruled.
• United States v. Redwine
  715 F.2d 315· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-17 ·cited 174×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence presented was sufficient to sustain the defendants' convictions for conspiracy to intimidate, substantive offenses of intimidation, and possession of an unregistered firearm.
• Herpich v. Wallace
  430 F.2d 792· 5th Cir.· 1970-07-14 ·cited 174×·via Aider And Abettor Liability
  Minority shareholders have stated a claim for relief under federal securities laws, entitling them to challenge the sale of their corporation's control in federal court.
• United States v. Pepe
  747 F.2d 632· 11th Cir.· 1984-11-28 ·cited 165×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient to charge the RICO offense and the evidence supported the convictions, except for Francis Santo on count five. The trial judge's rulings were not erroneous.
• United States v. Pheaster
  544 F.2d 353· 9th Cir.· 1976-08-19 ·cited 165×
  The court affirmed the conviction for conspiracy, finding sufficient evidence of interstate transportation and admitting the victim's hearsay statement.
• United States v. Fleishman
  684 F.2d 1329· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-26 ·cited 164×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in admitting agent opinion testimony regarding lookout activity, handwriting expert testimony, or coconspirator hearsay statements, and that sufficient evidence supported the conspiracy conviction.
• United States v. Kramer
  289 F.2d 909· 2d Cir.· 1961-05-02 ·cited 163×
  The dissenting judge held that the jury instruction regarding the value of blank money orders was a fatal error, invalidating the sentence on Count IV. The judge also dissented on the application of res judicata in criminal cases.
• United States v. Davis
  666 F.2d 195· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 155×
  Venue was proper for conspiracy and Travel Act counts, but not for the possession count, as the drugs were never in the trial district. Mrs. Davis's conspiracy conviction was supported by sufficient evidence.
• United States v. Kennedy
  564 F.2d 1329· 9th Cir.· 1977-11-28 ·cited 155×
  The court held that joinder of defendants was proper, denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion, and the trial court did not err in refusing to dismiss the indictment for failure to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury or in rejecting a requested jury instructi
• United States v. LaGUARDIA
  774 F.2d 317· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-07 ·cited 154×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and use of a firearm to commit a felony.
• Gurleski v. United States
  405 F.2d 253· 5th Cir.· 1968-11-27 ·cited 150×
• United States v. James
  528 F.2d 999· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-19 ·cited 148×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support conspiracy convictions, rejecting claims of insufficient evidence and improper publicity.
• United States v. Winter
  663 F.2d 1120· 1st Cir.· 1981-10-30 ·cited 142×
  The court held that the Government's use of a non-statutory immunity agreement with a key witness was permissible and did not violate defendants' rights, and that the jury's decision to credit the witness's testimony was within their prerogative.
• United States v. Cauble
  706 F.2d 1322· 5th Cir.· 1983-05-31 ·cited 140×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the RICO convictions, the indictment was adequate, and the forfeiture was lawful.
• Rolf v. Blyth
  570 F.2d 38· 2d Cir.· 1978-01-03 ·cited 140×
  The court held that a registered representative and his employer are not liable under § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 for losses suffered by a customer due to an independent investment advisor's fraud, as the representative lacked the requisite scienter.
• Landy v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.
  486 F.2d 139· 3d Cir.· 1973-07-30 ·cited 138×
  An appellate court's review is limited to the record that existed when the district court entered its order, and subsequent events cannot be considered to determine if the district court erred.
• United States v. Murphy
  768 F.2d 1518· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-19 ·cited 137×
  The court held that the recusal motion was untimely and waived because it was filed after sentencing and the evidence was not newly discovered.
• Beauford White v. State
  403 So. 2d 331· Fla.· 1981-03-20 ·cited 134×
  Beauford White was convicted of six first-degree murders, two attempted murders, and four robberies arising from an armed home invasion robbery that resulted in the execution-style killing of six victims and wounding of two others. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his convictio
• Sundstrand Corp. v. SUN Chem. Corp.
  553 F.2d 1033· 7th Cir.· 1977-02-23 ·cited 134×·via Aiding And Abetting Liability
  The court held that defendants Huarisa and Sun Chemical are liable for securities fraud under Rule 10b-5 due to material misrepresentations and omissions, and that Meers is liable for reckless omission of material facts. Damages were modified.
• Woodward v. Metro Bank OF Dallas
  522 F.2d 84· 5th Cir.· 1975-11-03 ·cited 134×
  The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that even if the note was a security, the bank did not meet the standard for aiding and abetting liability under Rule 10b-5.
• United States v. Wilson
  500 F.2d 715· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-18 ·cited 132×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no merit in the appellants' arguments regarding statutory vagueness, severance, admission of evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, or insufficiency of evidence.
• United States v. Amaral
  488 F.2d 1148· 9th Cir.· 1973-12-03 ·cited 132×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its voir dire, its failure to give a sua sponte cautionary instruction on eyewitness identification, its admission of evidence, its denial of a pre-trial hearing on photographic identification, or its exclusion of expert testimon
• United States v. Calabro
  467 F.2d 973· 2d Cir.· 1972-09-21 ·cited 132×
  The court affirmed convictions, finding sufficient evidence for forgery and conspiracy charges, and that defendants were not prejudiced by the alleged variance in conspiracy charges or denial of counsel.
• United States v. Rosner
  485 F.2d 1213· 2d Cir.· 1973-09-26 ·cited 130×
  The court held that the defendant was not entrapped as a matter of law and that the trial judge's jury instructions on entrapment were proper. The court also found no unlawful intrusion into attorney-client communications.
• Barfield v. United States
  229 F.2d 936· 5th Cir.· 1956-02-10 ·cited 130×
  The court held that the presumption of knowledge of stolen property from mere possession, particularly in the context of a hitchhiker temporarily driving a vehicle, is insufficient to sustain a conviction without additional corroborating circumstances.
• United States v. Alfrey
  620 F.2d 551· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-03 ·cited 127×
  The court held that Customs officers have statutory authority to board vessels sighted in customs waters for document checks, and that the plain view doctrine and exigent circumstances justified the subsequent warrantless search. The court also reversed convictions for importatio