Aiding And Abetting

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

• United States v. Padilla
  961 F.2d 322· 2d Cir.· 1992-04-06 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support Torres's aiding and abetting conviction and that the district court correctly applied the Sentencing Guidelines to Padilla's sentence.
• United States v. Levy
  955 F.2d 1098· 7th Cir.· 1992-01-30 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of a prior attempted drug transaction under Rule 404(b), in denying the defendant's motion to suppress statements made during a non-custodial interrogation, and in imposing an enhanced sentence.
• United States v. Robert Allen (91-5205) & Billy Webb (91-5206)
  954 F.2d 1160· 6th Cir.· 1992-01-24 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, holding that prosecutorial discretion in referring cases to federal court is broad, federal law governs search and seizure in federal prosecutions, and the evidence supported the conviction and sentencing findings.
• United States v. ST. Gelais
  952 F.2d 90· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the $1,000,000 fine was imposed in violation of the ex post facto clause because the offenses occurred in 1984, prior to the enactment of the statute under which the fine was calculated. The conviction and restitution were affirmed.
• United States v. Jairo Hernan PEÑA
  949 F.2d 751· 5th Cir.· 1991-12-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and that the district court did not err in admitting agent's notes or in giving a deliberate ignorance jury instruction.
• United States v. Lincoln
  925 F.2d 255· 8th Cir.· 1991-02-06 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not err in giving an aiding and abetting jury instruction and in imposing consecutive sentences for pre- and post-Sentencing Guidelines offenses.
• United States v. Harmon
  918 F.2d 115· 10th Cir.· 1990-11-01 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the testimony of a cooperating witness and evidence of prior drug transportation, as the jury was properly instructed to assess credibility and the probative value outweighed prejudice.
• United States v. Donovan Juan Michaels
  911 F.2d 131· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-13 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions and sentence, finding no reversible error in the jury instructions, the handling of closing arguments, or the constitutionality of the Special Assessment Statute.
• United States v. Radka
  904 F.2d 357· 6th Cir.· 1990-06-05 ·cited 16×
  The dissenting judge believes the trial judge's conclusion of exigent circumstances was supported by the record, warranting affirmance.
• Tew v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.
  728 F. Supp. 1551· S.D. Fla.· 1990-01-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the adverse interest exception bars the bank's defenses and counterclaims based on the misconduct of E.S.M. principals, and that the bank's counterclaims for attorneys' fees were improper.
• United States v. Seeley
  892 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1989-12-15 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the admissibility of an unavailable declarant's out-of-court statements against penal interest, even when used to inculpate, does not require a separate judicial assessment of the in-court witness's credibility; such credibility is for the jury.
• United States v. Millard E. Bolden
  889 F.2d 1336· 4th Cir.· 1989-11-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court erred in calculating the offense level, impermissibly departing from the Sentencing Guidelines based on factors already considered, and failing to impose a condition of confinement as required for probation.
• M.F. v. State
  549 So. 2d 225· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-09-26 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence presented was insufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence, thus reversing the finding of guilt.
• United States v. Johnson
  855 F.2d 299· 6th Cir.· 1988-08-23 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the plain language and legislative history of 18 U.S.C. § 1461 indicate that the 'knowingly causes to be delivered' provision applies only to senders of obscene material, not to recipients who order it for personal use.
• United States v. Segal
  852 F.2d 1152· 9th Cir.· 1988-07-26 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a bank customer can be liable for aiding and abetting the failure to file currency transaction reports if they conspire with a bank officer, and that a conspiracy to defraud the United States under 18 U.S.C. § 371 can be punished as a felony even if the underl
• Smith v. Ayres
  845 F.2d 1360· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-03 ·cited 16×
  A dissenting opinion argues that competent evidence supported a directed verdict for the plaintiff on liability, even though the trial judge had previously defaulted the defendants for failure to appear.
• United States v. Hall
  845 F.2d 1281· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-18 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of guilty on both counts of forging and possessing a stolen Treasury check, and that the admission of certain hearsay testimony did not constitute plain error.
• United States v. Doyle E. Campbell
  845 F.2d 1374· 6th Cir.· 1988-04-12 ·cited 16×
  The court should have excluded testimony of patients not listed in the indictment as it was improperly admitted under Rule 404(b) to prove character rather than intent for the charged offenses.
• United States v. Medina-Ramos
  834 F.2d 874· 10th Cir.· 1987-12-04 ·cited 16×
  Venue was properly laid in New Mexico under the doctrine of constructive possession, as the defendants retained the ability to control the suitcase even as it entered the state.
• United States v. Hayes
  827 F.2d 469· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-03 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction for conspiracy to violate currency transaction reporting requirements was valid because the transactions, even if broken into smaller amounts, were part of a single scheme with a complicit banker to evade reporting.
• United States v. Oldaker
  823 F.2d 778· 4th Cir.· 1987-06-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the defendant waived his Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) protections by his actions and that restitution under the Victim and Witness Protection Act applies only to offenses occurring after January 1, 1983.
• United States v. Viera
  819 F.2d 498· 5th Cir.· 1987-06-03 ·cited 16×
  The dissenting judge believes the case should be remanded to the district court to develop facts regarding alleged prosecutorial misconduct before ruling on the conviction's reversal.
• Virgie Mae Cockett v. State
  507 So. 2d 1217· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-06-03 ·cited 16×
  Virgie Mae Cockett was convicted of trafficking in cocaine as an aider and abettor based entirely on circumstantial evidence. The appellate court reversed, holding that the circumstantial evidence was susceptible to multiple reasonable inferences, including innocence, and therefo
• United States v. Bradley
  820 F.2d 3· 1st Cir.· 1987-05-26 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that a defendant cannot claim entrapment based solely on the actions of third parties unless the government agent instructed the intermediary to pressure the defendant.
• United States v. Corsino
  812 F.2d 26· 1st Cir.· 1987-02-25 ·cited 16×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support a finding of deceptive intent and materiality for a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and that the district court did not err in refusing a lesser-included offense instruction or in substituting a juror.
• United States v. Hollins
  811 F.2d 384· 7th Cir.· 1987-02-10 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions, holding that the district court properly denied motions to suppress evidence and dismiss the indictment, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict.
• United States v. Serna
  799 F.2d 842· 2d Cir.· 1986-08-25 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that evidentiary rulings were proper and sufficient evidence supported the convictions.
• United States v. Wright
  797 F.2d 245· 5th Cir.· 1986-08-18 ·cited 16×
  The dissent argues that the trial court erred in its interpretation of Louisiana law regarding the statute of limitations for a misdemeanor prosecution, which was the basis for the Hobbs Act conviction.
• United States v. Pflaumer
  774 F.2d 1224· 3d Cir.· 1985-10-09 ·cited 16×
  The court must reconsider whether an erroneous jury instruction on conspiracy, independent of withheld exculpatory material, warrants a new trial on all counts, and must apply the Bagley standard for materiality of withheld evidence.
• United States v. Albert
  773 F.2d 386· 1st Cir.· 1985-09-26 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion for severance, admitting the FDIC certificate, sustaining a codefendant's Fifth Amendment privilege, or refusing to grant a judgment of acquittal.
• United States v. Dekle
  768 F.2d 1257· 11th Cir.· 1985-08-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that there was no fatal variance between the indictment and evidence, joinder of defendants was proper, and various evidentiary rulings were either harmless error or not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. Laurence John Layton
  767 F.2d 549· 9th Cir.· 1985-07-29 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the 'Last Hour Tape' under Federal Rule of Evidence 403, as its probative value was substantially outweighed by its potential for unfair prejudice and confusion of the issues.
• FOX v. State
  469 So. 2d 800· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-04-11 ·cited 16×
  Caroline Ann Fox was convicted as a principal in the first degree for aiding and abetting a robbery committed by her co-defendant Griffin. The Florida appellate court reversed her conviction, holding that the circumstantial evidence was legally insufficient to prove beyond a reas
• Leroy v. R.C. Marshall
  757 F.2d 94· 6th Cir.· 1985-03-21 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the 'cause and prejudice' rule of Wainwright v. Sykes applies to procedural defaults in state court, requiring a habeas petitioner to demonstrate cause and prejudice for failure to raise issues on direct appeal.
• United States v. de Hernandez
  745 F.2d 1305· 10th Cir.· 1984-09-28 ·cited 16×
  The court held that ex parte communications between the trial judge and the jury, and the failure to provide a complete jury instruction on the right not to testify, constituted reversible error.
• United States v. Wade
  740 F.2d 625· 8th Cir.· 1984-08-06 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the in-court identification was not impermissibly suggestive, the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the seized items were admissible, and the failure to give a specific accomplice instruction was not plain error.
• United States v. Chippy Jones
  678 F.2d 102· 9th Cir.· 1982-05-26 ·cited 16×
• Scott v. Perini
  662 F.2d 428· 6th Cir.· 1981-09-30 ·cited 16×
  The dissenting judge held that the conviction for second-degree murder was not supported by proof beyond a reasonable doubt, violating due process.
• United States v. DeBROUSE
  652 F.2d 383· 4th Cir.· 1981-06-25 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Taft-Hartley Act prohibits a union official from requesting payments to a third party, even if the official does not directly receive the funds, and that the statute of limitations does not bar prosecution if the illegal request or acceptance occurred with
• United States v. Alvarez
  626 F.2d 208· 1st Cir.· 1980-07-28 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the appellant's convictions for conspiracy, aiding and abetting, and possession of cocaine, but that the special parole term was improperly imposed.
• United States v. Evaughn K. Prazak and John Edward Prazak, Jr.
  623 F.2d 152· 10th Cir.· 1980-06-19 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing certain jury instructions and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions for transporting a stolen motor vehicle in interstate commerce.
• Alessi v. United States
  593 F.2d 476· 2d Cir.· 1979-03-07 ·cited 16×
  The court reversed the conviction on the tax count, vacating it and allowing repleading, but remanded the narcotics count for an evidentiary hearing.
• United States v. Vines
  580 F.2d 850· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing a supplemental jury instruction on flight, in admitting the testimony of co-defendants, or in finding the indictment and evidence sufficient.
• United States v. Gonzalez
  582 F.2d 1162· 7th Cir.· 1978-09-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that aiding and abetting a narcotics offense falls under 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(11), and the proviso in § 1251(b) does not allow for a recommendation against deportation for such offenses.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Warren
  583 F.2d 115· 3d Cir.· 1978-09-01 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dissolving a permanent injunction because the original violation was technical, there was little likelihood of recurrence, and the injunction caused undue hardship due to changed circumstances and regulations.
• United States v. Molina
  581 F.2d 56· 2d Cir.· 1978-08-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Robert Molina of conspiracy to distribute heroin and aiding and abetting the substantive offense, applying the Pinkerton rule for coconspirator liability.
• United States v. Well
  572 F.2d 1383· 9th Cir.· 1978-04-12 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Jencks Act does not require a defendant to show prejudice when the government fails to produce discoverable statements, and suppression of testimony is an appropriate sanction for such failure.
• United States v. Martinez
  573 F.2d 529· 8th Cir.· 1978-04-03 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the convictions of both defendants, finding no merit in their arguments regarding suppression of statements, sufficiency of evidence, severance, admissibility of co-conspirator statements, or jury instructions.
• United States v. Tenorio
  565 F.2d 943· 5th Cir.· 1978-01-09 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the admission of hearsay evidence under the co-conspirator exception, even without strict adherence to Rule 104(a), was harmless error given the independent evidence supporting the conviction.
• United States v. Nelson
  563 F.2d 928· 8th Cir.· 1977-10-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the appellant was entitled to a jury instruction on the lesser included offense of possession for aiding and abetting distribution, as the evidence could permit a jury to find him guilty of possession and acquit him of the greater offense.