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

• United States v. Ruffin
  613 F.2d 408· 2d Cir.· 1979-12-28 ·cited 53×
  A person who causes another, who has the capacity to commit a crime, to engage in prohibited conduct can be punished as a principal under 18 U.S.C. § 2(b), even if the person causing the act lacks the capacity to commit it directly and the intermediary agent is acquitted.
• United States v. Ortega
  471 F.2d 1350· 2d Cir.· 1972-12-11 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in denying defendants' motions to identify, disclose the whereabouts of, or produce the government informant, as the informant's testimony was not shown to be essential to a fair determination of the issues.
• United States v. Leibowitz
  420 F.2d 39· 2d Cir.· 1969-12-19 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction for violating the Selective Service Act on two counts was proper, affirming the lower court's decision.
• Carrado v. United States
  210 F.2d 712· D.C. Cir.· 1953-12-10 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in various rulings regarding the indictment, evidence, witness testimony, and jury instructions, affirming the convictions.
• United States v. Smith
  951 F.2d 1164· 10th Cir.· 1991-11-15 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the district court erred in calculating the loss amount and enhancing the sentence for the defendant's role as an organizer, as the record did not support these findings.
• United States v. Jewel
  947 F.2d 224· 7th Cir.· 1991-10-21 ·cited 52×
  The exclusionary rule should apply to sentencing, as allowing illegally seized evidence would significantly undermine the Fourth Amendment.
• A.B.G. v. State
  586 So. 2d 445· Fla. 1st DCA· 1991-09-18 ·cited 52×
  Where circumstantial evidence shows an accused stood in close proximity to perpetrators, engaged in conversation with them, and demonstrated a deliberate pattern of conduct both before and after the crime, a jury may infer intent to participate in the theft as an aider and abetto
• United States v. Kaufman
  858 F.2d 994· 5th Cir.· 1988-10-17 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, the joinder of counts and defendants was proper, and the denial of severance motions was not an abuse of discretion.
• Mills v. State
  407 So. 2d 218· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-10-06 ·cited 52×
  Mills was convicted of first-degree murder, kidnapping for ransom, robbery, and conspiracy in connection with a kidnapping-robbery scheme that resulted in the victim's death. The appellate court affirmed the murder and robbery convictions but reversed the kidnapping conviction, r
• United States v. Robinson
  651 F.2d 1188· 6th Cir.· 1981-06-09 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for aiding and abetting mail and wire fraud was valid, and that the prosecutor's closing arguments were not improper comments on the defendant's failure to testify.
• United States v. Rodgers
  624 F.2d 1303· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-27 ·cited 52×
  The court affirmed convictions for mail fraud and making false statements, finding sufficient evidence of a single scheme to defraud, individual participation, and that mailings were in furtherance of the scheme.
• United States v. Chandler
  586 F.2d 593· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-21 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support convictions for interstate transportation of stolen goods due to failure to prove the $5,000 jurisdictional minimum. It also found insufficient evidence to convict Assistant Chief of Police Robert Lee Folsom of conspira
• Marvyn Gould v. American-Hawaiian S.S. Co.
  535 F.2d 761· 3d Cir.· 1976-04-08 ·cited 52×·via Aider And Abettor Liability
  The court held that the defendant was entitled to a trial on issues of materiality and negligence, and summary judgment was inappropriate.
• United States v. Tokoph
  514 F.2d 597· 10th Cir.· 1975-04-24 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction for aiding and abetting violations of 18 U.S.C. § 215 and § 656, and for violating 18 U.S.C. § 1014 and conspiracy, was supported by sufficient evidence and that the indictment was legally sufficient.
• United States v. PUI KAN LAM
  483 F.2d 1202· 2d Cir.· 1973-08-21 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the warrantless electronic interception of a conversation in a stranger's apartment, under suspicious circumstances and with no reasonable expectation of privacy, was not illegal under the Fourth Amendment or the relevant statute. The court also found sufficie
• Wessel v. Buhler
  437 F.2d 279· 9th Cir.· 1971-01-22 ·cited 52×
  The court held that an accountant is not liable under Rule 10b-5 for financial statements not disseminated to the public or for failing to disclose internal financial issues. The court also found the trial court erred in its method of calculating damages by improperly aggregating
• Gillespie v. United States
  368 F.2d 1· 8th Cir.· 1966-11-14 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the district court erred in finding sufficient probable cause for the search warrant, denying the motion to suppress, and admitting the seized evidence and its fruits.
• United States v. Shaffer
  291 F.2d 689· 7th Cir.· 1961-06-13 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the defendants were afforded a fair and impartial trial free from reversible error, and affirmed their convictions for conspiracy to evade excise taxes and related offenses.
• United States v. Wiley
  267 F.2d 453· 7th Cir.· 1959-05-20 ·cited 52×
  The majority opinion erred in remanding the case for reconsideration of probation, as the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying probation.
• United States v. Maria del Socorro Pardo Viuda De Aguilar
  883 F.2d 662· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-30 ·cited 51×
  The court held that appellants could not present evidence of their mistaken interpretation of immigration laws as a defense to charges of smuggling, transporting, or harboring aliens, as ignorance or mistake of law is not a defense and such evidence would create undue trial burde
• United States v. Gaggi
  811 F.2d 47· 2d Cir.· 1987-01-21 ·cited 51×
  The court held that 18 U.S.C. § 241 requires the victim of a conspiracy to be a citizen of the United States, and the district court erred in convicting defendants for a conspiracy against non-citizens.
• United States v. DI Stefano
  555 F.2d 1094· 2d Cir.· 1977-05-16 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to sustain Linda Di Stefano's convictions for conspiracy and aiding and abetting a bank robbery, and that an incorrect jury instruction regarding false exculpatory statements constituted plain error requiring reversal of her convi
• United States v. Maspero
  496 F.2d 1354· 5th Cir.· 1974-07-15 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the trailer was justified by probable cause and exigent circumstances, and that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for conspiracy and possession for some defendants, but not for Ruiz on the possession count.
• Kellum v. State
  104 So. 2d 99· Fla. 3d DCA· 1958-06-24 ·cited 51×
  Raymond Kellum, a Miami police officer, was convicted of aiding and assisting another officer in grand larceny and related crimes. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial due to prejudicial error caused by the trial judge's comments regarding corr
• United States v. Chiarelli
  192 F.2d 528· 7th Cir.· 1951-11-05 ·cited 51×
  The court held that the evidence presented was sufficient to support the conviction of both defendants for violating federal narcotic laws, and that the trial court did not err in its rulings.
• Isiah v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.
  960 F.3d 1296· 11th Cir.· 2020-06-01 ·cited 50×
  The court held that routine bank deposits do not constitute a fraudulent transfer under FUFTA, and a receiver lacks standing to bring aiding and abetting claims when the fraudulent acts of the entity in receivership are imputed to the receiver.
• Oreneile Masaka v. State
  4 So. 3d 1274· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-04-01 ·cited 50×
  Masaka appeals his convictions for attempted voluntary manslaughter and attempted robbery with a firearm, arguing that the trial court erred by excluding his cousin Panzo's admissible hearsay statements and by instructing the jury on the theory of principals without evidentiary s
• United States v. Woody F. Lemons
  941 F.2d 309· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-27 ·cited 50×
  The court held that convictions on counts 3-8 were multiplicitous to counts 1 and 2, as they constituted a single execution of the bank fraud scheme. The court also found sufficient evidence for conviction on count 12 regarding a forged endorsement.
• United States v. Zabaneh
  837 F.2d 1249· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-09 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the district court erred in sustaining appellant's conviction under count five and in failing to make required findings before admitting extrinsic offense testimony, but affirmed holdings on remaining points of error. The court also found that venue was proper
• United States v. Porter
  821 F.2d 968· 4th Cir.· 1987-06-22 ·cited 50×
  The dissenting judge would reverse all convictions and grant new trials due to cumulative errors in admitting evidence and improperly joining defendants.
• United States v. Figueroa
  720 F.2d 1239· 11th Cir.· 1983-12-05 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Vega but insufficient to convict Santiago and Figueroa of conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute.
• Collins v. State
  438 So. 2d 1036· Fla. 2d DCA· 1983-10-14 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to support the appellant's convictions for burglary and grand theft.
• United States v. Daly
  716 F.2d 1499· 9th Cir.· 1983-08-12 ·cited 50×
  The court held that a violation of the Speedy Trial Act's minimum 30-day preparation period, if treated as an erroneous denial of a continuance, warrants reversal and remand for a new trial, provided the defendant moved for dismissal. It also held that Nebraska certificates of ti
• United States v. Dolliole
  597 F.2d 102· 7th Cir.· 1979-04-20 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of prior crimes was permissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to prove intent, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting such evidence or in limiting cross-examination.
• United States v. Evans
  542 F.2d 805· 10th Cir.· 1976-10-04 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying pretrial motions, jury selection challenges, or in its handling of alleged trial errors, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdicts.
• United States v. Horsun Howard
  506 F.2d 1131· 2d Cir.· 1974-11-15 ·cited 50×
  The court held that a jury conviction for bank robbery cannot stand if the jury was not adequately instructed on the essential elements of the crime, even if there was ample evidence.
• United States v. Robinson
  475 F.2d 376· D.C. Cir.· 1973-03-07 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in refusing to allow voir dire questions about self-defense, that the jury instructions on aiding and abetting and flight were adequate, and that the robbery indictment, while imperfect, was sufficient given the jury instructions.
• The United States v. Miller
  460 F.2d 582· 10th Cir.· 1972-05-25 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the mobile home was justified under the automobile exception due to exigent circumstances and probable cause, and that the admission of certain testimony and prosecutorial remarks did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Virciglio
  441 F.2d 1295· 5th Cir.· 1971-05-06 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the evidence supported the jury's verdict of guilty, rejecting the appellant's claims of entrapment and lack of possession.
• 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.
• United States v. Phillips
  401 F.2d 301· 7th Cir.· 1968-08-29 ·cited 50×
  The court held that admitting evidence of a prior transaction, for which the defendant was acquitted, without informing the jury of the acquittal, was an abuse of discretion and deprived the defendant of a fair trial. Additionally, the court held that the defendant's statements w
• Baker v. United States
  395 F.2d 368· 8th Cir.· 1968-06-05 ·cited 50×
  The evidence was sufficient to support a jury finding that the defendant participated in or aided and abetted the interstate transportation of a stolen vehicle.
• Lucero v. United States
  311 F.2d 457· 10th Cir.· 1962-11-30 ·cited 50×
  The court held that constructive possession is sufficient to sustain a conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 174 for an aider and abettor, but mere association or presence is not enough. The evidence was sufficient for one count against Maestas but not another.
• Toles v. United States
  308 F.2d 590· 9th Cir.· 1962-10-09 ·cited 50×
  The court held that accomplice testimony is sufficient to support a conviction, and evidence of a prior plan to rob a market was admissible to show intent and association. The court also found no prosecutorial misconduct or constitutional infirmity in the bank robbery statute.
• Corey v. United States
  305 F.2d 232· 9th Cir.· 1962-06-15 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of guilty for concealing stolen property that constituted interstate commerce, and that the admission of certain evidence was proper.
• Odell Clark v. United States
  293 F.2d 445· 5th Cir.· 1961-08-16 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to sustain the conviction for concealing and transporting untaxed distilled spirits, as it amounted to mere suspicion and surmise.
• Stanley v. United States
  245 F.2d 427· 6th Cir.· 1957-05-22 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy and violating the Federal Train Wreck Act, and that no reversible error occurred during the trial.
• Albritton v. State
  32 Fla. 358· Fla.· 1893-06-01 ·cited 50×
  This case reviews a conviction for larceny where the appellant, Henry Albritton, was charged as a principal in the second degree for aiding and abetting his co-defendant, Andrew Albritton. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding no reversible error in the trial court
• United States v. Chotas
  913 F.2d 897· 11th Cir.· 1990-10-02 ·cited 49×
  A district court cannot depart downward under Sentencing Guidelines § 5K1.1 for substantial assistance without a motion from the government.
• United States v. Laurence John Layton
  855 F.2d 1388· 9th Cir.· 1988-08-16 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the district court properly exercised subject matter jurisdiction over charges of conspiracy and aiding/abetting the killing of a member of Congress and an internationally protected person, even though the acts occurred outside the United States. The court als