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. Janoe
  720 F.2d 1156· 10th Cir.· 1983-11-04 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the trial court erred in failing to hold a hearing on the voluntariness of the defendant's confession as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3501(a).
• Harmsen v. Smith
  693 F.2d 932· 9th Cir.· 1982-12-01 ·cited 44×·via Aiding And Abetting Liability
  The court held that the National Bank Act's Section 93 is not an exclusive remedy, allowing for concurrent claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and pendent state law claims. It also affirmed the sufficiency of evidence for aiding and abetting liability under
• United States v. Clemente
  640 F.2d 1069· 2d Cir.· 1981-02-26 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the jury charge on extortion under the Hobbs Act was legally sufficient, and that substantial evidence supported the convictions for aiding and abetting.
• United States v. Errol Ricardo Bizzard
  615 F.2d 1080· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-23 ·cited 44×
  The court held that instructing the jury on an offense not charged in the indictment, specifically assault, constitutes a fatal amendment of the indictment and is reversible error.
• United States v. Avarello
  592 F.2d 1339· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-13 ·cited 44×
  The court affirmed convictions for conducting an illegal gambling business, holding that the evidence was sufficient to link defendants to a single business involving five or more persons and that various procedural and constitutional challenges lacked merit.
• United States v. Wentland
  582 F.2d 1022· 5th Cir.· 1978-10-30 ·cited 44×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding no merit in the appellant's contentions regarding speedy trial, jury instructions, or sufficiency of evidence.
• United States v. Leslie
  542 F.2d 285· 5th Cir.· 1976-11-12 ·cited 44×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the evidence was sufficient, the trial court did not err in calling witnesses or allowing impeachment, and prior inconsistent statements were admissible under Rule 803(24).
• United States v. Kilcullen
  546 F.2d 435· 1st Cir.· 1976-08-31 ·cited 44×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions for interstate transportation of forged checks and conspiracy, and that Kilcullen's challenges to jury instructions did not constitute plain error.
• United States v. Swiderski
  539 F.2d 854· 2d Cir.· 1976-06-11 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the trial court erred by improperly placing the burden of proof on the defendant for the entrapment defense and by refusing to give an entrapment instruction to one of the defendants. The court also found the instruction regarding the scrutiny of an informer's
• United States v. Seymour Pollack
  534 F.2d 964· D.C. Cir.· 1976-03-31 ·cited 44×
  The court affirmed convictions for mail fraud, wire fraud, and sale of unregistered securities, finding no reversible error in the speedy trial claims, indictment sufficiency, evidence, jury instructions, or Brady disclosures.
• United States v. Bommarito
  524 F.2d 140· 2d Cir.· 1975-10-08 ·cited 44×
  The court held that Wharton's Rule does not bar conviction for conspiring to violate the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, and that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Atkins
  473 F.2d 308· 8th Cir.· 1973-01-17 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the government presented sufficient evidence to convict the appellant of aiding and abetting the purchase of heroin and that lay witnesses with sufficient experience could testify that the substance was heroin.
• United States v. Sarantos
  455 F.2d 877· 2d Cir.· 1972-02-03 ·cited 44×
  The court held that a jury instruction defining 'knowingly' to include reckless disregard or conscious avoidance of the truth is proper for charges under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and that the statute of limitations did not bar prosecution for conspiracy where an overt act occurred withi
• United States v. Errol B. Resnick
  455 F.2d 1127· 5th Cir.· 1972-02-03 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the second and third warrantless searches and seizures were invalid, requiring reversal of convictions based on that evidence, but affirmed the denial of suppression for one defendant due to lack of standing and affirmed a search based on consent.
• United States v. Francisco
  410 F.2d 1283· 8th Cir.· 1969-05-13 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for possession of stolen goods and conspiracy, and that the trial court did not err in its instructions or in refusing a mistrial.
• Marteney v. United States
  218 F.2d 258· 10th Cir.· 1954-12-30 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the jury instructions were proper, and the prosecutor's cross-examination was not prejudicial, affirming the conviction.
• United States v. Johnson
  123 F.2d 111· 7th Cir.· 1941-09-15 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the indictment was not demurrable due to duplicity or improper grand jury term extensions, as the alleged crimes stemmed from a single, continuing scheme and the grand jury acted within its statutory authority.
• Nigro v. United States
  117 F.2d 624· 8th Cir.· 1941-02-04 ·cited 44×
• Garcia v. State
  899 So. 2d 447· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-04-06 ·cited 43×
  Jorge Garcia was convicted by jury of burglary, grand theft, and trespass after being found in a van containing stolen property. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the burglary and theft convictions, holding that the state failed to present sufficient circumstantial evi
• United States v. Alvarez-Moreno
  874 F.2d 1402· 11th Cir.· 1989-06-07 ·cited 43×
  The court held that while an indictment must provide notice of specific acts for a Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) conviction, the defendant's actual notice of the acts used to prove the continuing series element satisfied due process.
• United States v. Alphonso Galloway Burroughs
  830 F.2d 1574· 11th Cir.· 1987-11-03 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the government's failure to disclose the wife's immunity was not a Brady violation because the defense learned of it and presented it to the jury, and the evidence was not material. Venue was proper as the defendant had a continuing stake in the drug sales in
• Chaney v. Brown
  730 F.2d 1334· 10th Cir.· 1984-03-21 ·cited 43×·via Aider And Abettor Liability
  The court held that the withheld exculpatory evidence, while not affecting the murder conviction, might have influenced the jury's decision to impose the death penalty, thus violating due process.
• United States v. Benny Bain Smith
  700 F.2d 627· 11th Cir.· 1983-03-14 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's conviction for conspiracy and aiding and abetting illegal firearms transfers, and that the prosecutor's comments did not constitute plain error.
• United States v. Thomas
  676 F.2d 531· 11th Cir.· 1982-05-17 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's conviction for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and that the trial court did not err in refusing a good character instruction or admitting testimony regarding the street value o
• United States v. DeROSA
  670 F.2d 889· 9th Cir.· 1982-03-04 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for RICO and narcotics violations, and that the trial court did not err in denying severance motions or in its rulings on other claims.
• United States v. Santoni
  585 F.2d 667· 4th Cir.· 1978-10-19 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions under the Hobbs Act were supported by sufficient nexus to interstate commerce and that the trial court did not err in denying severance motions.
• United States v. John
  508 F.2d 1134· 8th Cir.· 1975-01-06 ·cited 43×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that various procedural and evidentiary challenges raised by the appellants did not warrant reversal.
• Owens v. State
  289 So. 2d 472· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-02-08 ·cited 43×
  William Owens appeals his conviction for aggravated battery, challenging the sufficiency of evidence, admissibility of threats evidence, and whether the victim's injuries met statutory requirements for great bodily harm. The court affirmed the conviction, holding that evidence su
• Morgan Stanley & Co. Inc. v. Coleman (Parent) Holdings Inc.
  955 So. 2d 1124· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-03-21 ·cited 42×
  Morgan Stanley & Co. appeals a $1.58 billion judgment in favor of Coleman (Parent) Holdings Inc. (CPH) for fraud related to a merger with Sunbeam, Inc. The court reverses the judgment, holding that CPH failed to prove actual damages by establishing the fraud-free value of Sunbeam
• United States v. Atterson
  926 F.2d 649· 7th Cir.· 1991-02-25 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences, finding sufficient evidence for drug quantity, conspiracy, and other charges, and upholding the district court's evidentiary and procedural rulings.
• United States v. Jones
  880 F.2d 55· 8th Cir.· 1989-07-07 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the admission of prior convictions and bad acts was proper, the denial of reopening evidence was within the trial court's discretion, joinder and severance of charges and defendants were appropriate, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• Berrisford v. Wood
  826 F.2d 747· 8th Cir.· 1987-08-14 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, finding no constitutional error in the admission of evidence or jury instructions, and sufficient evidence for the conviction.
• United States v. Stovall
  825 F.2d 817· 5th Cir.· 1987-08-12 ·cited 42×
  The court held that sentences for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 657 (misapplication of funds) and 18 U.S.C. § 1006 (false entry) are not multiplicitous under the Blockburger test, as each requires proof of a fact the other does not. The court also applied the concurrent sentence doct
• United States v. Orley E. Perlaza and Alvaro Llanos
  818 F.2d 1354· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-13 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendants' convictions for conspiracy to distribute cocaine and possession with intent to distribute, and that the jury instructions were proper.
• United States v. Lewis
  787 F.2d 1318· 9th Cir.· 1986-04-18 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the failure to sever counts related to firearm possession from counts related to bank larceny and killing prejudiced the defendant's right to a fair trial on the killing charge, requiring reversal of that conviction.
• United States v. Falu
  776 F.2d 46· 2d Cir.· 1985-10-30 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the schoolyard statute (21 U.S.C. § 845a) applies to aiders and abettors and does not require the defendant to have knowledge of the school's proximity.
• United States v. Rosen
  764 F.2d 763· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-01 ·cited 42×
  The court held that while convictions for conspiracy, attempt, and importation were supported by sufficient evidence, the statutory maximum sentences for certain counts were exceeded, requiring resentencing.
• Metge v. Baehler
  762 F.2d 621· 8th Cir.· 1985-05-15 ·cited 42×
  The court held that summary judgment was inappropriate on the aiding and abetting claim, but affirmed summary judgment on the controlling person claim.
• United States v. Santano Coronel-Quintana
  752 F.2d 1284· 8th Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for continuance, severance, and suppression, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Ambrose
  740 F.2d 505· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-17 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the district judge, when sentencing an aider and abettor of a drug kingpin, is not bound by the minimum sentence provisions of the kingpin statute, allowing for more proportionate sentencing.
• United States v. Harris
  733 F.2d 994· 2d Cir.· 1984-04-13 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support convictions for attempting to possess heroin with intent to distribute, but sufficient for conspiracy to distribute heroin. The exclusion of defense testimony regarding the defendant's state of mind was an error requiri
• United States v. Pelusio
  725 F.2d 161· 2d Cir.· 1983-12-22 ·cited 42×
• United States v. Gomberg
  715 F.2d 843· 3d Cir.· 1983-08-30 ·cited 42×
  A conspiracy count is not duplicitous for having multiple objectives, and a defendant convicted of a continuing criminal enterprise should not receive separate sentences for conspiracy and underlying predicate offenses.
• Hall v. State
  420 So. 2d 872· Fla.· 1982-10-05 ·cited 42×
  Freddie Lee Hall appealed the denial of his motion to vacate his death sentence for first-degree murder and petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's denial and rejected Hall's claims of constitutional violations and ineffective
• United States v. Horton
  676 F.2d 1165· 7th Cir.· 1982-04-29 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the superseding indictment was sufficient, the denial of a continuance did not violate the Speedy Trial Act, the jury instructions were proper, the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, and the imposition of two sentences for two victims was corr
• Wright v. State
  402 So. 2d 493· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-08-11 ·cited 42×
  Dorothy Wright was convicted of second degree murder for aiding and abetting her co-defendant Joe La Rocca in the killing of Barbara Hall. Wright appeals, arguing she is entitled to acquittal, a new trial based on denial of a duress instruction, or at minimum reduction to manslau
• United States v. Maskeny
  609 F.2d 183· 5th Cir.· 1980-01-04 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the marijuana species defense was foreclosed by precedent, the warrantless search of the briefcase was a lawful border search, and the jury selection process did not violate constitutional or statutory requirements.
• United States v. Collom
  614 F.2d 624· 9th Cir.· 1979-11-23 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed both convictions, finding that the investigatory stop, arrest, and searches were lawful, and that the jury instructions, including those related to insanity and aiding and abetting, were adequate or properly handled.
• United States v. Austin
  585 F.2d 1271· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-27 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's convictions for misapplying bank funds, making false entries, and concealing facts, and that the prosecutor's closing argument remark was not an improper comment on the defendant's failure to testify.
• Isadore Hodges, Jr. v. Rose
  570 F.2d 643· 6th Cir.· 1978-02-14 ·cited 42×·via Aider And Abettor Liability
  The admission of one defendant's redacted confession, which still implicitly implicated the codefendant, violated the Bruton rule, but the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming independent evidence of guilt.