Aiding And Abetting

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

• United States v. Standefer
  610 F.2d 1076· 3d Cir.· 1979-08-10 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a defendant can be convicted of aiding and abetting a crime even if the principal has been acquitted.
• United States v. Houde
  596 F.2d 696· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-11 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for sanctions and continuance.
• John v. Carothers
  594 F.2d 225· 9th Cir.· 1979-03-30 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a federal court must dismiss a habeas corpus petition if any claim presented has not been exhausted in state courts, but may review the merits of exhausted claims. The court affirmed dismissal of the alibi instruction claim for failure to exhaust state remedie
• United States v. York
  578 F.2d 1036· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-23 ·cited 32×
  A conviction for criminal attempt is not precluded by proof of the completed crime, and a participant can be convicted as an aider and abettor even if they join the criminal enterprise after the substantive crime is technically complete but before its completion phase ends.
• United States v. Perez
  565 F.2d 1227· 2d Cir.· 1977-11-11 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the defendant waived his double jeopardy claim by failing to raise it at trial, and that sufficient evidence supported his conviction for willfully causing the preparation and presentation of false IRS forms.
• Mrs. Stanley (Joyce) Goldberg v. State
  351 So. 2d 332· Fla.· 1977-07-01 ·cited 32×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed convictions of three county commissioners and one spouse for bribery and conspiracy, holding that the conspiracy indictment was unconstitutionally deficient and that the prosecution failed to disclose material evidence of witness unreliability,
• United States v. Gramlich
  551 F.2d 1359· 5th Cir.· 1977-05-13 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the affidavit supporting the search warrant lacked sufficient probable cause, but the introduction of the seized evidence was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Williams
  544 F.2d 807· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-03 ·cited 32×
  The court held that customs agents lacked the authority under 19 U.S.C. § 1581(a) to board the houseboat based on the circumstances presented. Therefore, the motion to suppress the evidence found should have been granted.
• United States v. Caldwell
  544 F.2d 691· 4th Cir.· 1976-08-17 ·cited 32×
  The court affirmed the result on mail fraud and misapplication counts, with one judge concurring on different grounds for the mail fraud counts.
• United States v. Licursi
  525 F.2d 1164· 2d Cir.· 1975-11-11 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for aiding and abetting and that the district court properly refused to charge the jury on entrapment because the defendant failed to show lack of predisposition.
• United States v. Windom
  510 F.2d 989· 5th Cir.· 1975-04-07 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the admission of expert testimony supplementing a stipulation, the jury instructions regarding possession of genuine obligations and aiding and abetting, the prosecutor's 'con artist' remark, and the conviction on multiple counts were not reversible error.
• United States v. Addison
  498 F.2d 741· D.C. Cir.· 1974-06-06 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the admission of voiceprint analysis evidence was erroneous because it had not attained general acceptance in the scientific community, but affirmed the convictions because the error was harmless due to overwhelming independent evidence.
• United States v. Cassino
  467 F.2d 610· 2d Cir.· 1972-08-11 ·cited 32×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy and Travel Act violations, finding sufficient evidence and no prejudicial errors in the trial proceedings.
• United States v. Austin
  462 F.2d 724· 10th Cir.· 1972-06-26 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the evidence was amply sufficient to justify the conviction of each defendant for securities fraud and mail fraud, and that the trial court did not commit prejudicial error by denying severance motions and admitting evidence of similar offenses with limiting i
• United States v. GUY
  456 F.2d 1157· 8th Cir.· 1972-02-11 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to sever defendants, denying motions for recusal or production of evidence, or in its jury instructions, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions.
• United States v. Roth
  430 F.2d 1137· 2d Cir.· 1970-07-31 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the denial of a suppression hearing was proper and that the admission of identification testimony, despite a potentially flawed 'walk-through' procedure, did not taint the trial given other substantial evidence.
• United States v. Barnes
  383 F.2d 287· 6th Cir.· 1967-10-07 ·cited 32×
  The court should affirm convictions for conspiracy to violate the Interstate Travel Act, as the jury could infer that the defendants knowingly engaged in the conspiracy based on their roles and the foreseeable acts of a co-conspirator.
• Orozco-Vasquez v. United States
  344 F.2d 827· 9th Cir.· 1965-04-28 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction of appellant Lopez-Molano for possession of narcotics, and that the trial court did not err in limiting cross-examination regarding a witness's plea deal.
• United States v. Moia
  251 F.2d 255· 2d Cir.· 1958-01-16 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the use of telephone voice identification and eyewitness identification was permissible, and the trial court did not err in refusing to produce certain agent's memos or in its jury instructions.
• Herbert v. Imholte
  226 F.2d 585· 8th Cir.· 1955-11-01 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the offense of aiding and abetting tax evasion is complete upon the filing of the false return, and evidence of acts committed prior to the statute of limitations period is admissible to prove intent and the commission of the offense.
• Shockley v. United States
  166 F.2d 704· 9th Cir.· 1948-03-10 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for first-degree murder, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for severance, change of venue, or in its conduct during the trial.
• Adams v. State
  60 Fla. 1· Fla.· 1910-06-01 ·cited 32×
  The court considered whether the evidence supported a conviction for receiving stolen property when the defendant may have participated in the larceny itself. The court held that the evidence did not sufficiently prove the larceny was completed before the defendant's involvement,
• United States v. Moe Tillem
  906 F.2d 814· 2d Cir.· 1990-06-19 ·cited 31×
  The court affirmed convictions for city health inspectors extorting restaurants under color of official right, but reversed the convictions for a restaurant consultant, finding insufficient evidence of extortion or aiding/abetting extortion.
• United States v. Medina
  887 F.2d 528· 5th Cir.· 1989-10-18 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendants' convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marihuana and possession with intent to distribute marihuana.
• United States v. Mabry
  809 F.2d 671· 10th Cir.· 1987-01-20 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the officers' warrantless entry into the Mabry residence was justified by exigent circumstances arising after the arrest of a drug courier, and that a subsequent protective sweep was permissible.
• United States v. Arrellano-Rios
  799 F.2d 520· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-09 ·cited 31×
  The court held that probable cause existed for the arrest based on the agent's experience and the defendant's actions, and that increasing a fully served legal sentence would violate the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• United States v. Allen
  797 F.2d 1395· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-07 ·cited 31×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of all three defendants, finding no merit in their various claims regarding sufficiency of evidence, jury instructions, sentencing, and suppression of evidence.
• United States v. Moore
  786 F.2d 1308· 5th Cir.· 1986-04-16 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding expert testimony on eyewitness identification when other evidence of guilt was overwhelming, and that the continued retention of lawfully seized handguns for use as evidence did not violate the Fourth A
• Armco Indus. Credit Corp. v. SLT Warehouse Co.
  782 F.2d 475· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-07 ·cited 31×
  The court held that Conklin's silence regarding falsified invoices, despite his duty as a fiduciary, was sufficient to support jury verdicts against him and SLT for aiding and abetting fraud.
• United States v. Reese
  775 F.2d 1066· 9th Cir.· 1985-11-05 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support most convictions, except for firearms charges against Thomas Reese, and that his sentences must be vacated due to potential influence from ex parte submissions.
• United States v. Brown
  616 F.2d 844· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-08 ·cited 31×
  The court held that a failure to specifically instruct the jury on the FSLIC insurance element of the bank robbery statute was not plain error, given the context of the full jury charge and the indictment. The court also held that the evidence presented was sufficient to prove th
• United States v. Wedelstedt
  589 F.2d 339· 8th Cir.· 1978-12-15 ·cited 31×
  The court held that a conspiracy conviction can be sustained if proof exists for at least one of the alleged illegal objects, even if other alleged objects were not crimes or were not proven. The court also held that evidence seized by an informant acting independently of governm
• United States v. Jackson
  560 F.2d 112· 2d Cir.· 1977-07-19 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the appellants' actions constituted a substantial step towards bank robbery, corroborating their criminal intent, and thus met the definition of attempt under federal law.
• United States v. Kalama
  549 F.2d 594· 9th Cir.· 1976-12-06 ·cited 31×
  Consecutive sentences for possessing and making the same unregistered firearm constitute an unlawful pyramiding of punishments.
• United States v. Miles
  401 F.2d 65· 7th Cir.· 1968-08-01 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the trial court properly considered the admissible evidence.
• Penington v. State
  91 Fla. 446· Fla.· 1926-03-10 ·cited 31×
  Penington and Hand were convicted of assault with intent to murder based on circumstantial evidence and eyewitness testimony identifying Hand's voice near the scene. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that constructive presence with prior agreement to aid and abet consti
• Williams v. Bank OF Am. Corp.
  927 So. 2d 1091· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-05-17 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a trial court erred in granting summary judgment on a ground not specifically raised in the moving party's motion.
• United States v. Fabio Rodriguez Cortes
  949 F.2d 532· 1st Cir.· 1991-11-21 ·cited 30×
  The court held that admitting a defendant's identification card based on ethnic stereotypes was an abuse of discretion requiring a new trial.
• Castillo v. State
  590 So. 2d 458· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-11-15 ·cited 30×
  Joseph Castillo appeals his convictions for conspiracy to traffic in cocaine, possession of a firearm during trafficking, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The court reversed the conspiracy conviction due to insufficient evidence, reversed the firearm-during-felon
• United States v. Pryce
  938 F.2d 1343· D.C. Cir.· 1991-07-16 ·cited 30×
  The court should not consider the harmless error doctrine when the government fails to argue it, as this would violate the adversary system and judicial neutrality.
• United States v. Wood
  924 F.2d 399· 1st Cir.· 1991-02-01 ·cited 30×
  The court held that evidence of prior drug transactions was admissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) and that the admission of a letter, even if erroneous, constituted harmless error. However, the court found that one uncharged drug transaction was improperly included in calculating t
• Velazquez v. State
  561 So. 2d 347· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-05-01 ·cited 30×
  Velazquez appeals his vehicular homicide conviction for a death that occurred during an illegal drag race. The court reverses, holding that a drag race participant cannot be held criminally liable for the death of a co-participant who, through his own reckless driving, crashes an
• E.L.S. v. State
  547 So. 2d 298· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-08-08 ·cited 30×
  A passenger in a stolen vehicle, without more, does not engage in conduct proscribed by the Florida Anti-Fencing Act and therefore cannot be found guilty of related offenses.
• United States v. Power
  881 F.2d 733· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-03 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the jury instructions for the firearm charge were not plain error, the evidence was sufficient for the conspiracy and firearm convictions, an aider and abettor of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) is subject to mandatory minimum penalties, and the government's use of a pe
• United States v. Erwin
  875 F.2d 268· 10th Cir.· 1989-05-16 ·cited 30×
  A passenger has standing to challenge the legality of a traffic stop, but lacks standing to challenge the search of a vehicle absent a legitimate expectation of privacy in the searched area.
• United States v. Roberts
  881 F.2d 95· 4th Cir.· 1989-04-24 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for possession with intent to distribute over 100 kilograms of marijuana, and that various sentencing and procedural challenges lacked merit.
• United States v. Rastelli
  870 F.2d 822· 2d Cir.· 1989-03-16 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that evidence was sufficient to support guilty verdicts and that RICO conspiracy convictions can be based on aiding and abetting predicate acts.
• United States v. Salerno
  868 F.2d 524· 2d Cir.· 1989-01-31 ·cited 30×
  The court's majority opinion affirmed RICO convictions, but the dissenting judge argued that the evidence was insufficient for loansharking conspiracy convictions and that RICO convictions should be overturned due to insufficient evidence and statute of limitations issues.
• United States v. Perez
  849 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1988-06-03 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the admission of prior bad act evidence was an error that was not harmless, requiring vacatur of the conviction.
• United States v. Edgardo Giorgi
  840 F.2d 1022· 1st Cir.· 1988-03-07 ·cited 30×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that a prior plea agreement did not bar prosecution for arson and mail fraud, and that alleged prosecutorial misconduct before the grand jury did not warrant dismissal of the indictment.