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

• LHLC Corp. v. Cluett
  842 F.2d 928· 7th Cir.· 1988-03-03 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the securities fraud claim against the accountant was properly dismissed as the accountant's communication was not material to the investment decision and the accountant had no duty to disclose. The court also held that summary judgment for the seller on estop
• United States v. Normandeau
  800 F.2d 953· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-25 ·cited 49×
  The court held that knowledge of the quantity of marijuana is not an element of the offense under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a), and that a warrantless search of a vehicle is permissible if supported by probable cause.
• United States v. Willis
  759 F.2d 1486· 11th Cir.· 1985-04-23 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the police had probable cause to arrest Mahdi and reasonable suspicion to detain Willis, and that the subsequent arrests and evidence seizures were constitutional.
• Armstrong v. Clovis McALPIN
  699 F.2d 79· 2d Cir.· 1983-01-24 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the statute of limitations barred most claims because shareholders knew or should have known of the fraud with reasonable diligence, and that a breach of fiduciary duty alone does not violate federal securities laws.
• G. C. v. State
  407 So. 2d 639· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-12-15 ·cited 49×
  A juvenile was adjudicated delinquent as an aider and abettor to attempted burglary based on evidence that he knew of the crime and was present at the scene watching it occur. The appellate court reversed, holding that knowledge and presence alone are insufficient to establish ai
• United States v. Herbst
  641 F.2d 1161· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-08 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the appellants' Fourth Amendment rights were not violated by the search and seizure, and the district court did not err in denying the motion for use immunity.
• United States v. Brown
  571 F.2d 980· 6th Cir.· 1978-02-07 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the district court did not commit reversible error by dismissing two jurors, as proper procedures were followed and no abuse of discretion occurred. The court also found sufficient evidence to support the convictions.
• United States v. Dixon
  562 F.2d 1138· 9th Cir.· 1977-07-13 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the hearsay statement was improperly admitted under the coconspirator exception as to Dixon.
• United States v. Womack
  454 F.2d 1337· 5th Cir.· 1972-01-25 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the trial judge's conduct and jury instructions were so prejudicial as to deny the defendant a fair trial, requiring reversal and remand.
• United States v. Branker
  395 F.2d 881· 2d Cir.· 1968-05-13 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the convictions of Branker, Lopez, Moore, and Ross should be affirmed, as no prejudice resulted from the joint trial.
• Adolph Montague v. State
  17 Fla. 662· Fla.· 1880-01-01 ·cited 49×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for aiding and abetting an assault with intent to commit rape. The court held that a juror who had formed an opinion from rumor but could still be impartial was qualified, and that the defendant could be tried as a principal in the
• United States v. Gonzalez
  933 F.2d 417· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-01 ·cited 48×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentence, holding that the indictment was not multiplicitous, severance was not required, the display of cocaine was proper, expert testimony was admissible, and there was sufficient evidence for the convictions.
• United States v. Knox
  839 F.2d 285· 6th Cir.· 1988-02-12 ·cited 48×
  Statements made during investigatory detentions in airport security rooms, where the suspect voluntarily accompanied officers and reasonably believed they were not confined, do not require Miranda warnings.
• United States v. Lanier
  838 F.2d 281· 8th Cir.· 1988-02-01 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to exclude statements made by the appellant to a postal inspector and in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal or a new trial.
• United States v. Rodriguez
  808 F.2d 886· 1st Cir.· 1986-12-30 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to convict the appellant of aiding and abetting the importation of controlled substances on January 14, 1985, as the circumstantial evidence did not establish his intent to make the venture succeed.
• 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. Pabian
  704 F.2d 1533· 11th Cir.· 1983-05-19 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing the indictment, as the prosecutor's alleged inadvertent gestures and the representment procedures did not constitute prosecutorial misconduct sufficient to warrant dismissal.
• United States v. Johnson
  700 F.2d 699· 11th Cir.· 1983-03-17 ·cited 48×
  The court affirmed Clarence Johnson's conviction for mail fraud due to concurrent sentences but vacated the restitution order for further proceedings.
• United States v. Cederquist
  641 F.2d 1347· 9th Cir.· 1981-04-16 ·cited 48×
• J. L. B. v. State
  396 So. 2d 761· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-03-24 ·cited 48×
  J.L.B., a juvenile, was adjudicated delinquent for grand theft based on aiding and abetting another youth who stole a chain and medallion from a woman's neck in a parking lot. The Third District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the evidence was insufficient to establish tha
• United States v. Holder
  560 F.2d 953· 8th Cir.· 1977-08-23 ·cited 48×
  The court held that hearsay statements of a co-conspirator were inadmissible without independent evidence of conspiracy, and that such evidence was insufficient to support a conviction on Count III. The conviction on Count I was affirmed due to sufficient independent evidence.
• United States v. E. M. "Mike" Riebold and Donald T. Morgan
  557 F.2d 697· 10th Cir.· 1977-05-25 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying continuances, refusing to grant a mistrial, allowing jurors to take notes, or in its joinder of counts and defendants. The defendants' claims of ineffective assistance of counsel were also rejected.
• United States v. Villano
  529 F.2d 1046· 10th Cir.· 1976-01-08 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions under the Travel Act, and that the Act itself is constitutional. The court also found no reversible error regarding claims of taint from electronic surveillance or denial of access to certain FBI communication
• United States v. Coppola
  526 F.2d 764· 10th Cir.· 1975-12-08 ·cited 48×·via Aider And Abettor Liability
  The court held that hearsay statements of a co-defendant, when adopted by the defendant, are admissible as party admissions, and that evidence of other crimes is admissible to prove motive.
• United States v. Ovidio Omar Urdiales
  523 F.2d 1245· 5th Cir.· 1975-11-24 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the admission of prior offense evidence, co-conspirator hearsay, and evidence from an automobile search were proper, and that the jury charge and other alleged errors did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Wiebold
  507 F.2d 932· 8th Cir.· 1974-12-17 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict for aiding and abetting, the use of an Allen charge was not prejudicial, and the admission of expert testimony was not an abuse of discretion.
• Kerbs v. Fall River Indus., Inc.
  502 F.2d 731· 10th Cir.· 1974-09-06 ·cited 48×
  The court held that Thompson and Fall River Industries are liable under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 for participating in a fraudulent scheme, but the evidence was insufficient to hold Securities Transfer liable.
• United States v. Short
  493 F.2d 1170· 9th Cir.· 1974-03-18 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the jury instruction on aiding and abetting armed bank robbery was erroneous because it failed to require the jury to find that the defendant knew the principal was armed and intended to use the weapon.
• United States v. Ambrose
  483 F.2d 742· 6th Cir.· 1973-08-28 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the admission of unreliable hearsay evidence regarding the defendant's reputation required reversal of the conviction. It also found the jury instructions on entrapment to be erroneous.
• United States v. Cunningham
  423 F.2d 1269· 4th Cir.· 1970-04-09 ·cited 48×
  The court held that pre-custody photographic identifications and post-custody corporeal lineups, even with some procedural irregularities, did not violate defendants' constitutional rights or constitute reversible error, particularly when in-court identifications were independent
• United States v. Trollinger
  415 F.2d 527· 5th Cir.· 1969-08-19 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the exclusion of character evidence was proper, the jury charge was adequate, and the admission of statements complied with Miranda.
• Long v. United States
  360 F.2d 829· D.C. Cir.· 1966-04-15 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the admission of evidence and testimony challenged on grounds of Mallory violations, witness coercion, and improper jury instructions did not constitute reversible error.
• Grant v. United States
  291 F.2d 746· 9th Cir.· 1961-06-08 ·cited 48×
  The court held that issues not raised in the district court, including insufficiency of evidence and entrapment, are waived and cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. The indictment was also found sufficient.
• Pilgrim v. United States
  266 F.2d 486· 5th Cir.· 1959-05-13 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions under the Dyer Act for transporting, concealing, and disposing of a stolen motor vehicle in interstate commerce.
• United States v. Giuliano
  263 F.2d 582· 3d Cir.· 1959-02-20 ·cited 48×·via Aider And Abettor
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict of guilty on all counts of conspiracy and substantive offenses.
• Seabrooks v. United States
  32 F.4th 1375· 11th Cir.· 2022-05-06 ·cited 47×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the Supreme Court's decision in Rehaif v. United States applies retroactively to initial § 2255 motions, and the district court's error in giving an aiding and abetting instruction without proof of knowledge of the co-defendant's felon status was no
• Lewis v. State
  693 So. 2d 1055· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-05-14 ·cited 47×
  Willie Lewis was convicted by jury of throwing a Molotov cocktail through his ex-fiancée's bedroom window. On appeal, Lewis challenged the trial court's instruction on the law of principals (aiding and abetting), arguing there was insufficient evidence of accomplice liability. Th
• United States v. Paiva
  892 F.2d 148· 1st Cir.· 1989-12-21 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a bill of particulars or in admitting lay opinion testimony identifying a substance as cocaine.
• T.J.T. v. State
  460 So. 2d 508· Fla. 3d DCA· 1984-12-11 ·cited 47×
  A juvenile appellant was adjudicated delinquent for burglary after being observed at the victim's home attempting to manipulate windows while his companion also worked on them. The court affirmed, holding that the appellant's admission of intent to assist, combined with his activ
• United States v. Wayne Scaife (83-5666)
  749 F.2d 338· 6th Cir.· 1984-11-29 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the convictions on Count II (unlawful possession of firearms) must be reversed because the jury was not properly instructed on the element of unlawful carrying. All other convictions were affirmed.
• United States v. Rosa
  705 F.2d 1375· 1st Cir.· 1983-04-11 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of a death threat, in its jury instructions on aiding and abetting, or in refusing a special cautionary instruction for a witness with a mental condition.
• Healey v. Catalyst Recovery OF Pa., Inc.
  616 F.2d 641· 3d Cir.· 1980-01-29 ·cited 47×·via Aider And Abettor Liability
  The court held that a person selling securities in a merger, who opposes it and alleges nondisclosure, does not have a federal claim under § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 if state appraisal remedies exist and the vote was not necessary for the merger.
• Arthur Lipper Corp. & Arthur Lipper, III v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  547 F.2d 171· 2d Cir.· 1976-12-10 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the petitioners willfully aided and abetted violations of Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 by diverting fund commissions to an affiliate without proper disclosure, but modified the SEC's penalty to a 12-month suspension.
• United States v. Newman
  490 F.2d 139· 3d Cir.· 1974-01-08 ·cited 47×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to instruct the jury that aiding and abetting requires wilful participation, and by failing to strike testimony when a witness asserted the Fifth Amendment privilege on matters central to the defense. The court also found pr
• United States v. Gallo
  927 F.2d 815· 5th Cir.· 1991-03-19 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the stop of the defendant's car was justified by traffic violations and the search of a box within the car was a valid inventory search, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions.
• United States v. Dawn
  897 F.2d 1444· 8th Cir.· 1990-03-08 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying defendants' motions regarding discriminatory jury selection, extra-judicial influence, newly discovered evidence, sentencing guidelines, or other trial-related issues.
• United States v. Casto
  889 F.2d 562· 5th Cir.· 1989-11-20 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, jury instructions were proper, the admission of a co-defendant's guilty plea with a limiting instruction was not reversible error, chain of custody issues did not render evidence inadmissible, sentencing o
• United States v. Mohammad Dawood Nusraty
  867 F.2d 759· 2d Cir.· 1989-02-07 ·cited 46×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support the convictions for conspiracy, importation, and possession with intent to distribute, as mere presence at the airport and association with co-conspirators, even with a false exculpatory statement, did not prove knowi
• United States v. Hooks
  848 F.2d 785· 7th Cir.· 1988-06-08 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for conspiring to defraud the United States and for aiding in the filing of a false estate tax return, and that the admission of a co-conspirator's statement was proper.
• United States v. Gonzalez
  800 F.2d 895· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-23 ·cited 46×
  The court held that convictions for armed bank robbery and using a firearm during a crime of violence do not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for continuance, substitute counsel, or dismissal of the in