Aiding And Abetting

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

• Rolf v. Blyth
  637 F.2d 77· 2d Cir.· 1980-12-01 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the commencement date for Stott's aiding and abetting liability was July 31, 1969, and that the damage calculation method needed correction to accurately reflect actual losses. The court also ordered prejudgment interest to be awarded.
• United States v. Taylor
  612 F.2d 1272· 10th Cir.· 1980-01-02 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain a conviction for aiding and abetting the sale of a stolen vehicle, and that admitting a videotape of a prior similar transaction without showing it to the jury was not error.
• United States v. Beasley
  582 F.2d 337· 5th Cir.· 1978-10-19 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the defendant's second motion for a new trial, based on alleged newly discovered evidence and Brady violations, was properly denied because the evidence was not newly discovered and not exculpatory, and the prosecution did not commit misconduct.
• United States v. Dawson
  576 F.2d 656· 5th Cir.· 1978-07-14 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for aiding and abetting a bank robbery is affirmed because the evidence was sufficient and the trial court committed no reversible error.
• United States v. Abramson
  553 F.2d 1164· 8th Cir.· 1977-04-26 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the failure to disclose the suppression of a prior wiretap did not require suppression of the current wiretap evidence, and affirmed the convictions.
• United States v. Nims
  524 F.2d 123· 5th Cir.· 1975-12-05 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the joinder of defendants was proper because there was sufficient evidence to support the conspiracy charge, and the substantive offenses were distinct from the conspiracy charge, thus not making the indictment duplicitous.
• United States v. Sherpix, Inc.
  512 F.2d 1361· D.C. Cir.· 1975-05-15 ·cited 23×
  Convictions are reversed because the trial court improperly instructed the jury on obscenity using a post-offense judicial standard (Miller) rather than the pre-offense standard (Roth-Memoirs), violating due process. Additionally, the indictment was insufficient to charge Sherpix
• Anderson v. State
  24 Fla. 139· Fla.· 1888-01-01 ·cited 23×
  Joseph C. Anderson was convicted of murder in the first degree as an aider and abettor in the killing of Charles E. Abbe by Charles B. Willard on December 27, 1884. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that circumstantial evidence sufficiently established An
• NHB Advisors, Inc. v. Czyzyk
  95 So. 3d 444· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-08-22 ·cited 22×
  NHB Advisors, as liquidator of Butler Services International, appealed the dismissal of its claims against Joseph Czyzyk for lack of personal jurisdiction. The Fourth District reversed, holding that because NHB adequately alleged a conspiracy among defendants to commit tortious a
• Hogan v. Provident Life & Accident Ins.
  665 F. Supp. 2d 1273· M.D. Fla.· 2009-10-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that some claims were sufficiently pled, while others failed to meet pleading standards or were not recognized under Florida law, leading to partial dismissal.
• Kanisky Evans v. State
  985 So. 2d 1105· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-07-16 ·cited 22×
  Kanisky Evans sought relief for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, claiming his appellate counsel failed to raise a meritorious challenge to a jury instruction on principals given in connection with conspiracy charges. The Florida Third District Court of Appeal granted
• Rohlwing v. Myakka River Real Props., Inc.
  884 So. 2d 402· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-09-24 ·cited 22×
  The Rohlwings appealed the dismissal with prejudice of their fifth amended complaint in a trust dispute. The court reversed, holding that the trial court's dismissal orders lacked the required findings under Kozel v. Ostendorf and must be reconsidered with explicit application of
• United States v. Hollis
  971 F.2d 1441· 10th Cir.· 1992-07-31 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences for bank fraud, false statements, mail fraud, and money laundering, finding sufficient evidence and rejecting claims of double jeopardy and improper jury instructions, except for the fines imposed under the Sentencing Guidelines.
• United States v. Panet-Collazo
  960 F.2d 256· 1st Cir.· 1992-03-31 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence of Santana-Diaz and the sentence of Panet Collazo, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on jury instructions, prosecutorial misconduct, sentencing calculations, or role in the offense determinations.
• United States v. Vasquez
  953 F.2d 176· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-23 ·cited 22×
  The court held that exigent circumstances justified the warrantless entry into the residence and that there was sufficient evidence to support the defendants' convictions for conspiracy and aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute marijuana.
• United States v. Sabatino
  943 F.2d 94· 1st Cir.· 1991-08-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying severance, that sufficient evidence supported the convictions, that evidentiary rulings were proper or harmless, and that sentencing adjustments for obstruction of justice and leading role were appropriate, but vacated
• In re Sahlen & Assocs.
  773 F. Supp. 342· S.D. Fla.· 1991-07-10 ·cited 22×
  The court held that some plaintiffs adequately pleaded actual reliance for their Rule 10b-5 claims, while others failed to plead actual reliance or market efficiency for presumed reliance under the fraud-on-the-market theory. Claims under Rule 10b-5(2) in a primary market context
• United States v. Guerra-Marez
  928 F.2d 665· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that wiretap evidence was admissible, a variance between the indictment and evidence did not prejudice substantial rights, and prosecutorial explanations for jury strikes were adequate. However, the evidence was insufficient to support Wenseslada Reyes-Moya's consp
• Sheinkopf v. John K.P. Stone III
  927 F.2d 1259· 1st Cir.· 1991-03-07 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact regarding the existence of an attorney-client relationship, thus affirming the grant of summary judgment.
• AmeriFirst Bank v. Bomar
  757 F. Supp. 1365· S.D. Fla.· 1991-01-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the assignment of federal securities claims was valid and not champertous or collusive, but declined to create federal common law for breach of fiduciary duty claims, dismissing ADCO's state law claims for lack of jurisdiction.
• United States v. Stuart
  923 F.2d 607· 8th Cir.· 1991-01-16 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that sufficient evidence supported the distribution charge, evidentiary rulings were not prejudicial, Brady/Jencks material was properly handled, and entrapment claims lacked merit.
• United States v. Iglesias
  915 F.2d 1524· 11th Cir.· 1990-10-31 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's convictions for conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute and possession with intent to distribute, and that any prejudice from the prosecutor's closing argument was cured by the court's inst
• Collins v. Zant
  892 F.2d 1502· 11th Cir.· 1990-01-08 ·cited 22×
  The court held that both the Sandstrom and Jackson claims must be dismissed under Rule 9(b) as successive petitions, and the district court's denial of relief is affirmed.
• United States v. Erwin Pascacio Clotida
  892 F.2d 1098· 1st Cir.· 1989-12-20 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a defendant who fails to renew a motion for acquittal after presenting evidence waives the motion, but the conviction can still be reviewed for manifest injustice. The court also held that mere presence at the scene of a crime, without more, is insufficient to
• United States v. Nestor Uribe
  890 F.2d 554· 1st Cir.· 1989-12-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions were valid, affirming the district court's denial of their motions for a new trial based on claims of juror bias, improper venue, and suppression of wiretap evidence.
• United States v. Marieta Pareja
  876 F.2d 1567· 11th Cir.· 1989-07-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient for a jury to reasonably find the defendant guilty of aiding and abetting drug offenses, and thus the trial court erred in granting a judgment of acquittal.
• United States v. Wolf
  839 F.2d 1387· 10th Cir.· 1988-02-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendants' due process rights were not violated by the government's failure to produce gross tissue samples, and that statements admitted under the coconspirator exception were properly admitted or constituted harmless error. The court also found no due p
• United States v. Martinez-Nava
  838 F.2d 411· 10th Cir.· 1988-01-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that defendants' convictions were valid, rejecting all their appellate contentions regarding jury selection, supplemental jury instructions, admission of testimony, and prosecutorial misconduct.
• United States v. Santiago
  828 F.2d 866· 1st Cir.· 1987-09-14 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the denial of a trial transcript was harmless error, the warrantless search and arrest were justified by exigent circumstances, the evidence was sufficient for conviction, and the sentencing court properly considered information in the presentence report.
• United States v. Keefer
  799 F.2d 1115· 6th Cir.· 1986-09-02 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Speedy Trial Act was not violated, that a defendant can be convicted under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2(b) and 1001 even if the person caused to make the false statement is not guilty of the predicate offense, and that the false statements were material as a matter of l
• United States v. Cattle King Packing Co., Inc.
  793 F.2d 232· 10th Cir.· 1986-06-06 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence and no abuse of discretion in the trial court's rulings on venue, jury instructions, evidence admission, and sentencing.
• United States v. Robinson
  782 F.2d 128· 8th Cir.· 1986-01-23 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for aiding and abetting mail theft, and the in-court identification did not deny the defendant a fair trial.
• United States v. Fesler
  781 F.2d 384· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in its jury instructions for involuntary manslaughter by failing to define 'due caution and circumspection,' requiring vacation of those convictions. However, other convictions and sentences were affirmed.
• United States v. McCULLAH
  745 F.2d 350· 6th Cir.· 1984-09-27 ·cited 22×
• United States v. Sopczak
  742 F.2d 1119· 8th Cir.· 1984-09-06 ·cited 22×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the appellant of conspiracy and interstate transportation of a stolen motor vehicle, and that a mention of his plea change was harmless error.
• United States v. Cannington
  729 F.2d 702· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the trial court did not err in its rulings on joinder, severance, co-conspirator statements, identification, discovery, prosecutorial comment, or sentencing.
• United States v. Garrett
  720 F.2d 705· D.C. Cir.· 1983-11-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that McNamara's indictment was timely under the Speedy Trial Act by excluding delay due to his bond violation and bail hearing, and that sufficient evidence supported Garrett's conviction for aiding and abetting the transportation of a minor for sexual exploitation
• United States v. Williams
  714 F.2d 777· 8th Cir.· 1983-08-09 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the arrest was unlawful due to lack of probable cause and that the investigatory stop was not based on reasonable suspicion, leading to the suppression of the confession.
• United States v. Carmine Romano and Peter Romano
  684 F.2d 1057· 2d Cir.· 1982-06-24 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the receipt of television sets by a union pension fund trustee, given by a bank for depositing fund money, constituted a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1954, and affirmed convictions for RICO and other offenses.
• United States v. Nembhard
  676 F.2d 193· 6th Cir.· 1982-04-19 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing the indictment and suppressing evidence, as there was no legitimate basis for dismissal and the initial denial of the suppression motion was correct. The court vacated the district court's order and remand
• United States v. McCASKILL
  676 F.2d 995· 4th Cir.· 1982-04-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for aiding and abetting armed bank robbery was not reversible error, as he knew his co-defendants were armed, and he failed to properly object to the jury instructions at trial.
• United States v. Tunnell
  667 F.2d 1182· 5th Cir.· 1982-02-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the RICO convictions and forfeiture, and that the use of a videotaped deposition did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights.
• United States v. Adamson
  665 F.2d 649· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-11 ·cited 22×
• United States v. Kibler
  667 F.2d 452· 4th Cir.· 1982-01-08 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge believes venue for the substantive offense lay solely in the District of Columbia, making the trial in Maryland reversible error.
• United States v. Mayo
  646 F.2d 369· 9th Cir.· 1981-05-26 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the sufficiency of evidence, evidentiary rulings, double jeopardy claims, prosecutorial impropriety, prison transfer, voir dire, severance, jury instructions, or claims of ineffective counsel or self-incrimination
• United States v. Prichard
  645 F.2d 854· 10th Cir.· 1981-04-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the roadblock stop and subsequent search of the vehicle were lawful, and the evidence seized was admissible.
• United States v. Ferreboeuf
  632 F.2d 832· 9th Cir.· 1980-11-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that any error in admitting the appellant's pretrial statement was harmless, and that a stipulation of fact agreed to by counsel in open court binds the defendant without a specific voluntariness inquiry.
• United States v. Swacker
  628 F.2d 1250· 9th Cir.· 1980-09-29 ·cited 22×
  The admission of grand jury testimony is not a violation of the Fifth Amendment if the witness was advised of their rights and not compelled to testify. A judge's participation in trial is permissible if it clarifies evidence and does not appear to aid one party. Pre-indictment d
• United States v. Meinster
  619 F.2d 1041· 4th Cir.· 1980-04-18 ·cited 22×
  The government's failure to disclose a witness's potential benefit from testimony, even if unintentional, violates due process if the false testimony could have affected the jury's judgment.
• United States v. Rosado-Fernandez
  614 F.2d 50· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the conspiracy conviction and that a co-conspirator's possession of drugs could be imputed to the defendant. The court also held that the evidence sufficiently established the cocaine was the illegal 'L' isomer.