Aiding And Abetting

3,842 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• United States v. Shipp
  214 U.S. 386· U.S.· 1909-05-24 ·cited 36×
  The Supreme Court held that Sheriff Joseph F. Shipp and several associates were in contempt of court for their failure to prevent the mob lynching of Ed Johnson on March 19, 1906, despite having received notice that the Court had stayed Johnson's execution and ordered him retaine
• Hedgpeth v. Pulido
  555 U.S. 57· U.S.· 2008-12-02 ·cited 35×
  A jury instruction error allowing conviction on an invalid theory is not structural error and is subject to harmless-error review under the Brecht standard.
• United States v. Bishop
  959 F.2d 820· 9th Cir.· 1992-03-25 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict that Bishop was guilty of assault on Agent Jordan.
• Young v. State
  579 So. 2d 721· Fla.· 1991-02-28 ·cited 35×
  David Young was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for shooting a victim during an attempted car theft. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed both the conviction and death sentence, rejecting Young's challenges regarding the admissibility of his confession, suff
• United States v. Munoz-Fabela
  896 F.2d 908· 5th Cir.· 1990-03-07 ·cited 35×
  The court held that 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) provides an independent basis for criminal liability and does not require an underlying drug-trafficking conviction as a predicate for punishment.
• United States v. Anderson
  782 F.2d 908· 11th Cir.· 1986-02-18 ·cited 35×
  The court affirmed convictions for arson and bombing, holding that gasoline used in the manner described constitutes an 'explosive' under 18 U.S.C.A. § 844(i) and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions.
• United States v. Kadouh
  768 F.2d 20· 1st Cir.· 1985-07-24 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting testimony about the appellant's involvement with cocaine under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to show motive.
• United States v. Bernal
  719 F.2d 1475· 9th Cir.· 1983-11-10 ·cited 35×
  The court held that evidence of drug paraphernalia and cash found in the defendant's home was admissible, and incriminating statements made during a chance encounter with an agent were also admissible. However, the court reversed the firearm conviction due to insufficient evidenc
• United States v. Auviene D'Antignac
  628 F.2d 428· 5th Cir.· 1980-10-20 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the facts were sufficient to support a limited investigatory stop of the vessel.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Savoy Indus., Inc.
  587 F.2d 1149· D.C. Cir.· 1978-07-14 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to transfer the case, and that the district court's findings of securities law violations were not clearly erroneous.
• United States v. Ann (LNU) Decker and Larry J. Vice
  543 F.2d 1102· 5th Cir.· 1976-12-10 ·cited 35×
  The court held that vicarious liability under Pinkerton v. United States is applicable to narcotics distribution conspiracies and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to admit a juvenile adjudication for impeachment purposes.
• Hampton v. State
  336 So. 2d 378· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-05-18 ·cited 35×
  George Hampton was convicted of assault with intent to commit robbery and assault with intent to commit murder in the second degree for his role as a lookout and armed participant in a store robbery where his brother shot the store owner. The appellate court affirmed both convict
• Connolly v. State
  172 So. 3d 893· Fla. 3d DCA· 2015-07-29 ·cited 34×
  John Connolly, an FBI agent, was convicted of second degree murder with a firearm as a lesser included offense of first degree premeditated murder in the killing of John Callahan in 1982. The en banc court upheld the conviction and the reclassification of the second degree murder
• Myles Franklin Andrews v. State
  693 So. 2d 1138· Fla. 1st DCA· 1997-05-22 ·cited 34×
  Appellant Andrews challenged the revocation of his probation for alleged violations of conditions requiring him to live without violating any law and not to possess weapons. The court reversed, finding insufficient evidence that Andrews was a principal to aggravated battery, impr
• United States v. Cheape
  889 F.2d 477· 3d Cir.· 1989-11-14 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a jury's rejection of a coercion or duress defense at trial does not preclude the sentencing court from considering coercion or duress as a mitigating factor for a downward departure under U.S.S.G. § 5K2.12.
• United States v. MacHor
  879 F.2d 945· 1st Cir.· 1989-06-29 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the sufficiency of the evidence, the admission of co-conspirator statements, the denial of a motion to substitute counsel, the refusal to exclude the case agent, or the limitation of cross-examination.
• United States v. Jacob T. Ellzey (88-3459) & Paul W. Cochran (88-3470)
  874 F.2d 324· 6th Cir.· 1989-04-24 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions and that any errors in admitting evidence or failing to record side-bar conferences were harmless.
• United States v. Iredia
  866 F.2d 114· 5th Cir.· 1989-02-03 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for credit card fraud was not reversible error, as any potential prejudice from racial comments or prosecutorial remarks was cured by jury instructions, and the search of his vehicle and admission of evidence were lawful.
• United States v. Silverman
  861 F.2d 571· 9th Cir.· 1988-11-16 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court erred in admitting the extrajudicial statements of an alleged co-conspirator because the independent evidence presented was insufficient to corroborate those statements and establish the defendant's connection to the conspiracy by a preponde
• Davis v. Kemp
  829 F.2d 1522· 11th Cir.· 1987-09-30 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in considering a successive habeas petition and that the prosecutor's closing arguments did not render the sentencing fundamentally unfair. The court also found sufficient evidence for the rape conviction and rej
• United States v. Gabriel
  810 F.2d 627· 7th Cir.· 1987-01-15 ·cited 34×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence of criminal intent to sustain the defendants' convictions for conspiracy, solicitation, attempted arson, and aiding and abetting. The court also held that one defendant was precluded from asserting the entrapment defense.
• United States v. Lamp
  779 F.2d 1088· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-06 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evidentiary rulings or jury instructions, and that the sentences were not disproportionate.
• United States v. Cotton
  770 F.2d 940· 11th Cir.· 1985-09-06 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence and no reversible error in jury instructions, search and seizure, or prosecutorial misconduct.
• United States v. Dupuy
  760 F.2d 1492· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-22 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a district court errs by accepting conceded Brady material and failing to disclose it or determine its discoverability. The prosecutor's duty to disclose exculpatory material under Brady v. Maryland cannot be shifted to the court.
• United States v. Harris
  701 F.2d 1095· 4th Cir.· 1983-03-01 ·cited 34×
  The court held that inconsistent jury verdicts are permissible due to jury lenity, even within a single count of an indictment, and that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for involuntary servitude and conspiracy resulting in death.
• United States v. Pozos
  697 F.2d 1238· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-01 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendants' convictions for conspiracy, possession with intent to distribute, and carrying a firearm during a felony, and that the trial court did not err in denying a change of venue or suppressing evidence.
• United States v. Marrale
  695 F.2d 658· 2d Cir.· 1982-12-13 ·cited 34×
  The court held that cumulative punishments may be imposed for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 659 (theft from foreign shipment) and 18 U.S.C. § 2113(b) (bank larceny) when they arise from a single transaction, as Congress intended to address different evils.
• United States v. Melton
  689 F.2d 679· 7th Cir.· 1982-09-22 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the convictions of both appellants, finding sufficient evidence to support their RICO conspiracy and mail fraud convictions.
• United States v. Morales
  677 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1982-03-01 ·cited 34×
  A conspiracy conviction will be reversed if the jury's acquittal on substantive counts, combined with jury instructions limiting overt acts to those alleged, amounts to a finding that no overt act occurred.
• United States v. Merryman
  630 F.2d 780· 10th Cir.· 1980-09-18 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the investigatory stop and subsequent search were lawful, and the admission of evidence of prior acts and the prosecutor's comments did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Clark
  613 F.2d 391· 2d Cir.· 1979-12-28 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the acquittal on the conspiracy charge did not necessarily preclude conviction on the substantive importation charges, as a rational jury could have acquitted on conspiracy without finding innocence of importation.
• United States v. Mora
  598 F.2d 682· 1st Cir.· 1979-05-17 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the government failed to present sufficient evidence to support a conspiracy conviction, as there was no proof linking the appellant to the illegal activity or an agreement.
• United States v. Mahler
  579 F.2d 730· 2d Cir.· 1978-06-26 ·cited 34×
  The court held that while Federal Rule of Evidence 609(b) requires an on-the-record finding for admitting convictions over ten years old, the error in this case was harmless. The court also rejected other contentions regarding trial fairness and sentencing.
• United States v. Wallace
  578 F.2d 735· 8th Cir.· 1978-06-13 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the federal prosecution did not violate the Petite policy and that the defendants' other challenges to their convictions lacked merit.
• United States v. Rajeh Kazni
  576 F.2d 238· 9th Cir.· 1978-06-05 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the alleged hearsay evidence was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt and that the record did not support a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal.
• United States v. Groves
  571 F.2d 450· 9th Cir.· 1978-02-15 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the government's filing of a marihuana indictment after the appellant asserted his statutory rights under the Speedy Trial Act created an appearance of vindictiveness, requiring reversal.
• United States v. Severiano Olivarez Gonzalez
  548 F.2d 1185· 5th Cir.· 1977-03-18 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the trial court did not err by not conducting a Jackson v. Denno hearing because the defendant waived the right to such a hearing by failing to properly challenge the admissibility of his confession. The court also held that collateral estoppel did not bar tes
• United States v. Carter Camp
  541 F.2d 737· 8th Cir.· 1976-09-02 ·cited 34×
  An indictment is insufficient if it omits an essential element of the offense, even if the statute is cited and the jury is properly instructed.
• United States v. Cortwright
  528 F.2d 168· 7th Cir.· 1975-12-09 ·cited 34×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the convictions for conspiracy to distribute controlled substances and for the substantive offense of distributing narcotics, and that the defendants' other claims of error were meritless.
• United States v. Beck
  511 F.2d 997· 6th Cir.· 1975-03-11 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the Hobbs Act conviction was improper due to its overlap with the bank theft statute, but the bank theft conviction was affirmed. The warrantless search and seizure of the automobile were reasonable under the circumstances.
• United States v. Moore
  486 F.2d 1139· D.C. Cir.· 1973-05-14 ·cited 34×
• United States v. Rogers
  475 F.2d 821· 7th Cir.· 1973-03-07 ·cited 34×
  The court held that markings on money orders were sufficient to infer interstate movement and that compelling handwriting exemplars in specific forms did not violate constitutional rights. The court also found that a witness's Fifth Amendment refusals did not unduly prejudice the
• United States v. Gimelstob
  475 F.2d 157· 3d Cir.· 1973-02-21 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the appellants' numerous claims of error, including challenges to the search warrant, joinder of offenses, admissibility of evidence, jury instructions, and sufficiency of evidence, were without merit.
• United States v. Sarno
  456 F.2d 875· 1st Cir.· 1972-03-06 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the defendant's convictions for conspiracy and the substantive drug offense did not violate double jeopardy, and that hearsay declarations of co-conspirators were admissible.
• United States v. Lowry
  456 F.2d 341· 5th Cir.· 1972-01-25 ·cited 34×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to convict Lowry of conspiracy or aiding and abetting, and insufficient evidence to convict Flores of conspiracy or importation. The court also found the jury charge on count four impermissibly shifted the burden of proof.
• United States v. Reed
  446 F.2d 1226· 8th Cir.· 1971-08-20 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding that the defendant aided and abetted the robbery, and that the prosecutor's conduct and admission of certain evidence did not constitute prejudicial error.
• United States v. Crane
  445 F.2d 509· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-04 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion for a new trial, as the defendant failed to demonstrate the government suppressed exculpatory evidence or that he exercised due diligence in discovering the evidence.
• United States v. Egenberg
  441 F.2d 441· 2d Cir.· 1971-03-26 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the convictions for unlawful payment of gratuities and filing false statements were supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• United States v. Fuentes
  432 F.2d 405· 5th Cir.· 1970-10-05 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions were supported by substantial evidence and that their procedural arguments, including challenges to the indictment and evidentiary rulings, were waived by failure to object or lacked merit.
• United States v. Weiser
  428 F.2d 932· 2d Cir.· 1969-11-13 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant was not entrapped as a matter of law and that the trial court did not err in compelling a psychiatric examination or admitting electronic surveillance evidence.