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. Lord
  565 F.2d 831· 2d Cir.· 1977-11-15 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the district court erred by allowing prejudicial information about a witness's stabbing to be disclosed to the jury venire and by refusing to poll the jury about exposure to prejudicial newspaper articles during the trial.
• United States v. Brown
  547 F.2d 1264· 5th Cir.· 1977-03-04 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence admitted was relevant, the jury charge was not plain error, and there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction for aiding and abetting.
• United States v. Dingle
  546 F.2d 1378· 10th Cir.· 1976-12-27 ·cited 42×
  The court held that a presentence investigation report is not a 'statement' producible under the Jencks Act and that the procedure of calling witnesses who invoke the Fifth Amendment before granting immunity is permissible. The court also affirmed the finding of competent counsel
• United States v. Austin
  529 F.2d 559· 6th Cir.· 1976-02-10 ·cited 42×
  A defendant cannot receive separate punishments for a conspiracy charge and substantive bribery offenses when the proof for the substantive offenses necessarily includes all elements of the conspiracy.
• United States v. Knippenberg
  502 F.2d 1056· 7th Cir.· 1974-08-15 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to convict the defendant on mail fraud counts occurring before his knowing participation in the scheme, but sufficient for the count of transporting stolen securities in interstate commerce.
• United States v. Peterson
  488 F.2d 645· 5th Cir.· 1974-01-18 ·cited 42×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support the conspiracy convictions for both appellants, but affirmed James E. Peterson's conviction on the substantive offenses.
• United States v. Cordell Cassell
  452 F.2d 533· 7th Cir.· 1971-10-06 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed the convictions of Cassell and Rice, finding no reversible error, but reversed Jackson's conviction due to the improper admission of his confession and handwriting exemplar obtained in violation of Miranda.
• United States v. Gower
  447 F.2d 187· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-01 ·cited 42×·via Aider And Abettor Liability
  The court held that the defendant's various contentions regarding the grand jury process, continuance denial, pre-trial motions, juror qualification, judicial conduct, sufficiency of evidence, and variance between indictment and proof were without merit.
• United States v. Barfield
  447 F.2d 85· 5th Cir.· 1971-05-28 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction for aiding and abetting a post office break-in.
• Farese v. United States
  428 F.2d 178· 5th Cir.· 1970-04-20 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the discovery of unintroduced cash by the jury during deliberations constituted reversible error because it could not be affirmatively shown that the error was not prejudicial.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. N. Am. Research & Dev. Corp.
  424 F.2d 63· 2d Cir.· 1970-03-25 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the preliminary injunction against North American, White, and Bowman was properly granted, but the refusal to enjoin Dillman, Blumberg, Orenzoff, and Lars Hagglof & Co. was vacated and remanded.
• United States v. Bradley
  421 F.2d 924· 6th Cir.· 1970-01-20 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions for bank robbery, aiding and abetting, and conspiracy against both defendants.
• United States v. Schwartz
  398 F.2d 464· 7th Cir.· 1968-07-12 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its jury instructions or rulings on evidence.
• White v. United States
  394 F.2d 49· 9th Cir.· 1968-04-09 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy and aiding and abetting importation of narcotics, and that the trial court did not err in admitting testimony or in its jury instructions.
• Woodside v. State
  206 So. 2d 426· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-01-30 ·cited 42×
  Cecil George Woodside, Jr. was convicted of rape along with six other defendants tried jointly. He was sentenced to life imprisonment after a jury verdict, and appealed on five grounds including prosecutorial misconduct, jury instructions on aiding and abetting, trial court comme
• Thomas v. United States
  398 F.2d 531· 5th Cir.· 1967-09-22 ·cited 42×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, affirming its prior decision to reverse the conviction under Count Two.
• United States v. Carlson
  359 F.2d 592· 3d Cir.· 1966-04-28 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the appellant of aiding and abetting the passing of counterfeit bills and that the suppression of evidence was properly denied.
• United States v. Kenner
  354 F.2d 780· 2d Cir.· 1965-12-15 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the trial judge's modified Allen charge, while borderline coercive, was saved by disclaimers and willingness to accept any verdict, and that other claims of error lacked merit.
• Giragosian v. United States
  349 F.2d 166· 1st Cir.· 1965-07-15 ·cited 42×
  The evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict that the bank manager willfully misapplied bank funds, a necessary predicate for convicting the defendant of aiding and abetting.
• Chaudoin v. State
  118 So. 2d 569· Fla. 2d DCA· 1960-02-19 ·cited 42×
  Russell Chaudoin was convicted of maliciously breaking down a gate belonging to another. On appeal, he challenged the sufficiency of evidence and the admissibility of surveyor testimony regarding venue. The court affirmed, holding that Chaudoin could be convicted as a principal i
• Wright v. United States
  175 F.2d 384· 8th Cir.· 1949-06-21 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of conviction under the Mann Act, and that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence or in its jury instructions.
• Rocco DiLEO and Louise DiLeo v. Ernst & Young
  901 F.2d 624· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-07 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the complaint failed to plead fraud with the particularity required by Rule 9(b) and lacked sufficient allegations of scienter and duty for aiding and abetting claims.
• United States v. Raoul Rivalta
  892 F.2d 223· 2d Cir.· 1989-12-21 ·cited 41×
  The court affirmed the convictions but remanded for further findings and reconsideration of the sentences imposed.
• United States v. Draper
  888 F.2d 1100· 6th Cir.· 1989-11-02 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the appellant of aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute cocaine, that cross-examination of an alibi witness regarding prior kidnapping charges was permissible for impeachment, and that the dual sentencin
• United States v. Maez
  872 F.2d 1444· 10th Cir.· 1989-04-19 ·cited 41×
  A warrantless arrest conducted by surrounding a home with armed officers and coercing the occupant to exit violates the Fourth Amendment, and evidence obtained thereafter is tainted unless sufficiently attenuated.
• Valdez v. State
  504 So. 2d 9· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-12-30 ·cited 41×
  Francis Valdez was convicted of second-degree grand theft as an aider and abettor after driving a vehicle from which a woman exited with stolen merchandise. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the state failed to prove the specific intent required for aidi
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Rogers
  790 F.2d 1450· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-03 ·cited 41×
  The dissent argues that the trial court's findings were clearly erroneous and that Rogers aided and abetted securities fraud.
• United States v. Monks
  774 F.2d 945· 9th Cir.· 1985-10-21 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying severance motions, admitting statements as adoptive admissions, refusing to allow cross-examination on a prior burglary, denying motions for mistrial, or refusing to dismiss charges based on alleged misrepresentation i
• United States v. Mendoza
  722 F.2d 96· 5th Cir.· 1983-12-12 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the totality of circumstances, including an informant's tip and corroborating surveillance, established probable cause for the warrantless search of the vehicle, and that post-arrest statements were admissible.
• United States v. Long
  674 F.2d 848· 11th Cir.· 1982-04-30 ·cited 41×
  The court affirmed the convictions of both appellants, finding no merit in their challenges to the Fourth Amendment issues, sufficiency of evidence, or trial conduct.
• United States v. Cahalane
  560 F.2d 601· 3d Cir.· 1977-08-11 ·cited 41×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the conspiracy conviction, but the district court erred in granting acquittal on the substantive counts for illegal exportation. The court also dismissed the defendants' cross-appeals.
• United States v. Eberhardt
  417 F.2d 1009· 4th Cir.· 1969-10-15 ·cited 41×
  The court affirmed the convictions but remanded for reconsideration of sentences, holding that while subsequent misconduct can inform sentencing, a judge cannot penalize defendants for offenses of which they were not convicted.
• McBRIDE v. United States
  409 F.2d 1046· 10th Cir.· 1969-03-11 ·cited 41×
  The court held that alleged errors, including the admission of testimony about unrelated crimes and the trial judge's questioning, did not constitute plain error affecting substantial rights and did not deny the defendant a fair trial.
• United States v. Regis Gary Tornabene
  222 F.2d 875· 3d Cir.· 1955-06-07 ·cited 41×
  An indictment charging aiding and abetting a bank officer's willful misapplication of funds is insufficient if it does not allege the essential elements of the underlying offense, including the bank officer's wrongdoing.
• United States v. Simone
  205 F.2d 480· 2d Cir.· 1953-06-15 ·cited 41×
• Johnson v. State
  88 Fla. 461· Fla.· 1924-12-16 ·cited 41×
  Neal Johnson was convicted of first-degree murder in the killing of Mary Pierson, but the Florida Supreme Court reversed and granted a new trial because the State Attorney made prejudicial statements calling the defendant a "brute" and alluding to bestiality during closing argume
• United States v. Stan Musial Trujillo
  906 F.2d 1456· 10th Cir.· 1990-06-28 ·cited 40×
  The court held that denying a defendant a reduction for acceptance of responsibility based on their silence during a presentence interview does not violate the Fifth Amendment, and that disparate sentences between co-defendants are permissible if they are not similarly situated.
• United States v. Jimenez-Perez
  869 F.2d 9· 1st Cir.· 1989-03-06 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions and that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of the marijuana's street value.
• United States v. Antonino Aiello
  864 F.2d 257· 2d Cir.· 1988-12-23 ·cited 40×
  An aiding and abetting offense can serve as a predicate for the continuing criminal enterprise statute if the defendant is a "kingpin."
• United States v. Mothershed
  859 F.2d 585· 8th Cir.· 1988-10-14 ·cited 40×
  The admission of the defendant's prior conviction for possessing stolen bank money was prejudicial error because it was not relevant to any material issue other than propensity, thus requiring reversal and a new trial.
• United States v. Goff
  847 F.2d 149· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-02 ·cited 40×
  The court clarified its prior opinion, correcting misleading language regarding double jeopardy vacaturs for certain counts of conspiracy to import and possess.
• United States v. Reinis
  794 F.2d 506· 9th Cir.· 1986-07-14 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the defendant could not be convicted of aiding and abetting, conspiring to violate, or causing concealment of violations of the Reporting Act because the bank had no duty to report the transactions under the Act or its valid regulations.
• United States v. Pacheco
  794 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1986-06-20 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the denial of severance motions was not an abuse of discretion, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute marijuana.
• United States v. Irvin
  787 F.2d 1506· 11th Cir.· 1986-04-28 ·cited 40×
  The acquittal of alleged co-conspirators in a prior trial does not preclude the conviction of another alleged co-conspirator in a subsequent trial, nor does it bar the use of acts underlying those acquittals as overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy.
• United States v. Picciandra
  788 F.2d 39· 1st Cir.· 1986-03-31 ·cited 40×
  The court held that pre-indictment delays did not violate due process rights, evidentiary rulings were proper, and jury instructions were adequate. The judgments of sentence are affirmed.
• United States v. Gomez
  776 F.2d 542· 5th Cir.· 1985-10-08 ·cited 40×
  The evidence was sufficient to support the convictions of Antonio Reyes Espinoza for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana and aiding and abetting the substantive offense.
• United States v. COX
  752 F.2d 741· 1st Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the prosecutor's improper comments on the defendants' failure to testify did not warrant a new trial given the strong evidence, the curative instruction, and the isolated nature of the misconduct. The court also rejected other grounds for appeal.
• United States v. Martin
  747 F.2d 1404· 11th Cir.· 1984-12-05 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the indictment and jury instructions for aiding and abetting were flawed, leading to reversal of convictions on those counts. However, the court affirmed the conviction for obstructing the IRS, finding the statute and evidence sufficient.
• United States v. O'Connor
  737 F.2d 814· 9th Cir.· 1984-07-12 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the government's conduct was not outrageous, there was sufficient evidence of possession, and evidentiary rulings were not reversible error. The convictions are affirmed.
• United States v. James A. Whitley (83-5428)
  734 F.2d 1129· 6th Cir.· 1984-05-02 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting testimony regarding the giving of Miranda rights, refusing to disclose an informant's identity, or denying a motion for severance.