Aiding And Abetting

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

• United States v. Elizondo
  920 F.2d 1308· 7th Cir.· 1990-11-02 ·cited 21×
  The court held that while the prosecution's questioning of a defendant regarding an accident report was improper and lacked a good faith factual basis, it did not constitute reversible error or plain error given the totality of the evidence. The court also found the abbreviated P
• United States v. Onel Colon
  880 F.2d 650· 2d Cir.· 1989-07-14 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court erred in admitting evidence of prior similar acts because the defendant's defense theory, asserting a lack of recollection of the event, removed the issue of intent from dispute.
• United States v. Jordan
  810 F.2d 262· D.C. Cir.· 1987-01-27 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction was supported by overwhelming evidence, and while a procedural error in sentencing enhancement required remand, the enhancement itself was permissible.
• Fratello v. State
  496 So. 2d 903· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-10-22 ·cited 21×
  Charles Fratello was convicted of first-degree murder in the killing of Michael Johnson at a bar in Broward County. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, rejecting challenges to the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence, the aiding and abetting jury instru
• United States v. Zamora
  784 F.2d 1025· 10th Cir.· 1986-02-24 ·cited 21×
  The court affirmed convictions for manufacturing and possessing methamphetamine with intent to distribute, finding sufficient evidence for both appellants and rejecting claims of error regarding expert testimony, informant disclosure, and jury instructions.
• United States v. Thomas
  768 F.2d 611· 5th Cir.· 1985-08-01 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conspiracy conviction, the jury instructions on entrapment and conflicting theories were proper, and the exclusion of polygraph examiner testimony was correct.
• Doherty v. Am. Motors Corp.
  728 F.2d 334· 6th Cir.· 1984-02-24 ·cited 21×
  The court held that a corporation cannot conspire with its own employees and that the plaintiff's claims were barred by collateral estoppel due to a prior nolo contendere plea and subsequent proceedings.
• United States v. McCULLEY
  673 F.2d 346· 11th Cir.· 1982-04-16 ·cited 21×
  The court held that venue was proper for the mailbag injury charges and that the trial court did not err in denying severance, admitting statements, or refusing to suppress evidence from the search.
• United States v. Caicedo-Asprilla
  632 F.2d 1161· 5th Cir.· 1980-11-26 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the trial judge's denial of recusal was proper, the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions, the seizure and search of the vessel were lawful, and the prosecutor's comment was not an improper reference to the defendants' silence.
• United States v. Nelson
  599 F.2d 714· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-30 ·cited 21×
  The court held that collateral estoppel does not bar retrial on substantive drug distribution counts after an acquittal on a conspiracy charge, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in declaring a mistrial due to a deadlocked jury.
• United States v. Carr
  582 F.2d 242· 2d Cir.· 1978-08-10 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the government is not required to plead and prove that a person named on a loan application did not exist or that the defendant lacked authorization to use their name.
• Hochfelder v. Ernst & Ernst
  503 F.2d 1100· 7th Cir.· 1974-08-30 ·cited 21×
  Genuine issues of material fact exist regarding the adequacy of the accountants' audits and their compliance with professional standards, precluding summary judgment.
• United States v. Moraites
  456 F.2d 435· 3d Cir.· 1972-02-09 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently charged the elements of misapplication of bank funds and that the evidence supported the conviction for conspiracy and substantive misapplication charges.
• Xydas v. United States
  445 F.2d 660· D.C. Cir.· 1971-04-21 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in quashing the subpoena for the FBI informant file and that the prosecution's failure to disclose a portion of grand jury testimony was not reversible error.
• United States v. McCORMICK
  309 F.2d 367· 7th Cir.· 1962-10-12 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of conspiracy and unlawful transportation of gambling devices, and that the search warrant was validly issued.
• United States v. Bozza
  155 F.2d 592· 3d Cir.· 1946-05-17 ·cited 21×
  The court held that evidence was insufficient to sustain convictions for concealment and transportation of alcohol, but sufficient for carrying on an illicit distillery business. The court also held that a sentence could be corrected to conform to statutory requirements even afte
• Pujals Ex rel. El Rey de Los Habanos v. Garcia
  777 F. Supp. 2d 1322· S.D. Fla.· 2011-03-28 ·cited 20×
  The court granted in part and denied in part the plaintiff's motion to strike affirmative defenses, striking some for legal insufficiency and treating others as specific denials.
• United States v. Dischner
  974 F.2d 1502· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-03 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the RICO statute and Alaska's commercial bribe receiving statute were not unconstitutionally vague as applied to the defendants' conduct. The court also found no abuse of discretion in proceeding with an eleven-person jury and no i
• United States v. Regan
  940 F.2d 1134· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-23 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions and sentences, finding no variance between the indictment and proof, sufficient evidence for distribution counts, proper jury instructions, and correct offense level calculation.
• United States v. Duke
  940 F.2d 1113· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-23 ·cited 20×
  The court held that convictions for both continuing criminal enterprise and conspiracy violate the double jeopardy clause, requiring one conviction to be vacated. Other convictions were affirmed.
• United States v. Moon
  926 F.2d 204· 2d Cir.· 1991-02-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendant's base offense level should be calculated on one kilogram of cocaine, not two, and that the five-year minimum sentence provision did not apply to his conspiracy offenses which predated the statutory amendment.
• United States v. Vontsteen
  910 F.2d 187· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendant's due process rights were not violated by the resentencing, as the aggregate sentence was not increased and there was no evidence of judicial vindictiveness.
• United States v. Johnson
  911 F.2d 1394· 10th Cir.· 1990-08-09 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of Marion Johnson, Marshall Johnson, and Willie Lee Dancy, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings.
• United States v. Litteral
  910 F.2d 547· 9th Cir.· 1990-07-30 ·cited 20×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions for conspiracy and manufacturing methamphetamine, and that the Sentencing Guidelines were constitutional and properly applied. The court also held that the search warrant was validly obtained and that Wy
• United States v. Powell
  894 F.2d 895· 7th Cir.· 1990-01-31 ·cited 20×
  The court held that two counts of conspiracy to distribute different drugs were multiplicitous, requiring vacation of one conviction and resentencing. The court also held that the conviction for using a firearm during a drug trafficking crime was not a violation of double jeopard
• United States v. Valencia-Roldan
  893 F.2d 1080· 9th Cir.· 1990-01-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that 21 U.S.C. § 845b is a separate offense statute, not a sentence enhancement, and does not require proof that the defendant knew the minor's age.
• United States v. Hughes
  891 F.2d 597· 6th Cir.· 1989-12-13 ·cited 20×
  The government failed to prove the defendants had the requisite intent to defraud the bank, an essential element for misapplication of bank funds.
• United States v. Marroquin
  885 F.2d 1240· 5th Cir.· 1989-09-27 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the exclusions in section 3161(h) of the Speedy Trial Act do not apply to the thirty-day period in section 3161(c)(2), and that other claims regarding double jeopardy, jury instructions, evidence admissibility, and sufficiency of evidence were meritless.
• Singer v. Olympia Brewing Co.
  878 F.2d 596· 2d Cir.· 1989-06-28 ·cited 20×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdicts and that the setoff of a prior settlement was proper under the one satisfaction rule.
• United States v. Ascarrunz
  838 F.2d 759· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a co-conspirator's statements made after a defendant's arrest are admissible if made in furtherance of the ongoing conspiracy by an unarrested co-conspirator. The court also found sufficient evidence to support the convictions and no abuse of discretion in den
• United States v. Chase
  838 F.2d 743· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a jury can rationally find guilt for simple possession as a lesser included offense of possession with intent to distribute, even if the prosecution's evidence suggests distribution, and that cautionary instructions regarding extrinsic evidence were adequate.
• DCD Programs, Ltd. v. Leighton
  833 F.2d 183· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-27 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying leave to amend the complaint without providing a justifying reason, as such denial is inconsistent with the spirit of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
• United States v. Unruh
  855 F.2d 1363· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-03 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the jury instruction on intent to injure or defraud was potentially misleading, and that the failure to instruct on the defense of board consent or good faith constituted reversible error for certain counts, requiring remand.
• United States v. Thirion
  813 F.2d 146· 8th Cir.· 1987-03-05 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the doctrine of specialty does not prohibit using conspiracy as an evidentiary fact to prove substantive offenses, and that the district court did not err in denying motions for recusal, severance, or mistrial, nor in refusing a limiting instruction.
• United States v. Renato Guida
  792 F.2d 1087· 11th Cir.· 1986-07-03 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court's error in sending an unredacted witness and exhibit list to the jury was harmless because the information was cumulative of evidence already presented, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for passing and possessing
• United States v. Bowman
  783 F.2d 1192· 5th Cir.· 1986-02-24 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for mail fraud and making false statements to federally insured banks, and that the district court did not err in denying a mistrial based on an alleged unproduced tape recording.
• United States v. Rivera
  781 F.2d 229· 1st Cir.· 1985-12-26 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court had jurisdiction over criminal charges for false statements made in Medicare cost reports, and that sufficient evidence supported the defendants' convictions for conspiracy and making false statements.
• United States v. Hadi Zandi
  769 F.2d 229· 4th Cir.· 1985-08-08 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions for possession of opium with intent to distribute were supported by sufficient evidence, and that their rights under the Speedy Trial Act were not violated.
• United States v. Petz
  764 F.2d 1390· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-05 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the record did not clearly establish an unequivocal waiver of the right to conflict-free counsel, deferring the issue to a collateral proceeding.
• United States v. Hill
  766 F.2d 856· 4th Cir.· 1985-07-03 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its consideration of testimony at sentencing and complied with FRCrP 32(c)(3)(D) by making a finding as to controverted matters in the presentence report.
• United States v. Barry D.W. Clark
  765 F.2d 297· 2d Cir.· 1985-06-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that violating a bank's lending limit, designed to protect against pecuniary loss, constitutes 'misapplication' under 18 U.S.C. § 656, and that the jury instructions, when viewed in context, were not erroneous.
• United States v. Sys. Architects, Inc.
  757 F.2d 373· 1st Cir.· 1985-02-22 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendants' waivers of their right to a jury trial and their right to testify were valid, and that the trial court did not err in admitting expert testimony or denying motions for acquittal. The court also found that the defendants waived their venue objec
• United States v. Bush
  749 F.2d 1227· 7th Cir.· 1984-12-10 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the defendant's conviction for armed robbery.
• United States v. Jeraline Ayotte
  741 F.2d 865· 6th Cir.· 1984-08-24 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the convictions of Labadie and Logan were supported by sufficient evidence and properly admitted testimony, while Ayotte's conviction was reversed due to an erroneous restriction on her cross-examination.
• United States v. Pope
  739 F.2d 289· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-20 ·cited 20×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence for a rational jury to find the defendant guilty of aiding and abetting the forgery of a United States income tax-refund check.
• United States v. Snellen Johnson
  735 F.2d 1200· 9th Cir.· 1984-06-26 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the ex parte hearing and bail revocation did not prejudice the defendant, expert testimony was properly admitted, and the deposition of an unavailable witness was admissible.
• United States v. Nelson
  733 F.2d 364· 5th Cir.· 1984-05-18 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a defendant need not know that carrying a firearm is unlawful to be convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(2), and that sufficient evidence existed to prove Nelson's intent to obstruct a federal investigation.
• Feela v. Israel
  727 F.2d 151· 7th Cir.· 1984-02-03 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the introduction of van theft evidence, for which the defendants had been acquitted, was not harmless error as to the conspiracy conviction, requiring it to be set aside. However, the court found that the introduction of this evidence, as well as comments on p
• United States v. Whitt
  718 F.2d 1494· 10th Cir.· 1983-09-30 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in conducting the voir dire, that the mailings of county warrants were in furtherance of the mail fraud scheme, that sufficient evidence supported the Hobbs Act extortion convictions, and that instructing the jury o
• United States v. Gann
  718 F.2d 1502· 10th Cir.· 1983-09-30 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the mailing of a county warrant to a bank, even an innocent third party, was part of executing a fraudulent scheme for mail fraud purposes. The evidence was sufficient to prove the defendant knowingly and willfully participated in the kickback scheme.