Aiding And Abetting

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

• United States v. Long
  952 F.2d 1520· 8th Cir.· 1991-12-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in acquitting the defendants based on insufficient evidence and in conditionally granting a new trial, reversing both orders.
• United States v. Stowell
  947 F.2d 1251· 5th Cir.· 1991-11-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Tucker of conspiracy and aiding and abetting, but that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the issue of multiple conspiracies for Wood.
• West v. State
  585 So. 2d 439· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-09-04 ·cited 12×
  Leroy West was convicted of first-degree murder as an aider and abettor when two others committed an armed robbery and shooting. The appellate court reversed, finding insufficient evidence that West knew in advance about the crime or intended to participate in it, despite his pre
• United States v. Medina
  940 F.2d 1247· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-31 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an indictment for aiding and abetting requires citation of the substantive statute, but not necessarily naming the principal. It also held that a conviction for engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise subsumes lesser-included conspiracy convictions, requi
• United States v. Caruth
  930 F.2d 811· 10th Cir.· 1991-04-16 ·cited 12×
  The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's sentence, holding that the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that he was a "minimal participant" under the Sentencing Guidelines.
• Molecular Tech. Corp. v. Al Valentine
  925 F.2d 910· 6th Cir.· 1991-02-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that accepting a jury verdict with inconsistent findings and misapplications of instructions was reversible error, and that a judgment notwithstanding the verdict should have been granted for the Snyder defendants on MoTech's negligent misrepresentation claim due t
• United States v. Sanchez-Mata
  925 F.2d 1166· 9th Cir.· 1991-02-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to connect the appellant to the drug conspiracy or to establish that he had dominion and control over the seized drugs.
• United States v. Lowrimore
  923 F.2d 590· 8th Cir.· 1991-01-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the sentencing procedure violated the Confrontation Clause, the error was harmless, and the conviction and sentence were affirmed.
• United States v. Pulley
  922 F.2d 1283· 6th Cir.· 1991-01-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that allowing two government agents to remain in the courtroom as witnesses violated Rule 615, but the error was harmless. The court also affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding no reversible error in the hearsay or sentencing departure issues.
• Taylor v. Kincheloe
  920 F.2d 599· 9th Cir.· 1990-12-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a defendant's voluntary decision to vacate a plea agreement, even after jeopardy has attached, does not bar retrial on the original charges, and that no presumption of vindictiveness arises from the reinstatement of charges or an increased sentence following a
• United States v. Martin
  920 F.2d 345· 6th Cir.· 1990-11-30 ·cited 12×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute convictions, finding insufficient evidence to prove the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Visman
  919 F.2d 1390· 9th Cir.· 1990-11-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Congress has the constitutional authority to regulate intrastate criminal cultivation of marijuana, and that the defendant waived his right to challenge a sentencing enhancement for obstruction of justice by failing to object in the district court.
• United States v. San Vidal G. Barragan
  915 F.2d 1174· 8th Cir.· 1990-10-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a defendant's sentence can be enhanced based on a co-defendant's possession of a firearm during the offense if that possession was reasonably foreseeable to the defendant, even if the defendant was not convicted of a weapons charge or conspiracy.
• United States v. Delgado
  914 F.2d 1062· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that venue was improper for the possession conviction but affirmed the conspiracy conviction.
• United States v. Adams
  914 F.2d 1404· 10th Cir.· 1990-09-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the mandatory minimum sentence enhancement applied to an aider and abettor, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• United States v. Vega-Encarnacion
  914 F.2d 20· 1st Cir.· 1990-09-12 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the jury convictions and sentences, finding sufficient evidence for convictions and no appellate jurisdiction to review sentences within the applicable guideline range.
• Ross v. Bolton
  904 F.2d 819· 2d Cir.· 1990-05-30 ·cited 12×
  A clearing firm can use the in pari delicto defense to bar an investor's suit if the investor bears substantially equal responsibility for the transactions and barring the suit does not significantly interfere with the enforcement of securities laws.
• United States v. Cortes
  895 F.2d 1245· 9th Cir.· 1990-02-08 ·cited 12×
  A notice of appeal filed in a criminal case before the disposition of a motion for new trial is effective and does not divest the district court of jurisdiction to rule on the motion.
• United States v. Grandinetti
  891 F.2d 1302· 7th Cir.· 1989-12-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the circumstantial and direct evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support the defendant's convictions for conspiracy, misapplication of funds, and fraud.
• United States v. Ware
  890 F.2d 1008· 8th Cir.· 1989-11-27 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance, the Fourth Amendment was not violated by the search of the storage bin, and the girlfriend's testimony was admissible.
• United States v. Evans
  883 F.2d 496· 6th Cir.· 1989-08-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting the appointment book and the officer's testimony, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.
• United States v. Frazier
  880 F.2d 878· 6th Cir.· 1989-07-26 ·cited 12×
  Collateral estoppel may preclude retrial on counts where a jury was unable to agree if a rational jury could have grounded its acquittal on issues that would necessarily be decided against the government in a retrial.
• United States v. Braxton
  877 F.2d 556· 7th Cir.· 1989-06-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the government was not required to provide a list of rebuttal witnesses under Rule 12.1 when the defendant voluntarily provided an alibi notice without a government demand, and that the jury instructions, while not perfect, were not reversible error.
• United States v. Dotson
  871 F.2d 1318· 6th Cir.· 1989-04-12 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions, finding that the jury instructions given were adequate and that the evidence supported the jury's findings.
• United States v. Attanasio
  870 F.2d 809· 2d Cir.· 1989-03-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the joinder of defendants and offenses was proper under Rule 8(b) and that the district court did not err in denying severance motions. The court also found no constructive amendment of the indictment and that the "two-inference" jury charge, while improper, w
• United States v. Bruce Zalman (87-6183)
  870 F.2d 1047· 6th Cir.· 1989-02-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant waived any objection regarding the precise limits of his duty to disclose the sham nature of marriages because it was not properly raised below.
• United States v. Oldfield
  859 F.2d 392· 6th Cir.· 1988-09-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant's argument regarding the exclusivity of the odometer tampering statute was not preserved for appeal due to untimely filing of the motion. The court also held that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding that the use of the mails was in f
• Ruffin v. Dugger
  848 F.2d 1512· 11th Cir.· 1988-06-20 ·cited 12×
• United States v. Mejia
  844 F.2d 209· 5th Cir.· 1988-04-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the standard of review for sufficiency of evidence claims is procedural and can be applied retroactively, and that the evidence presented was sufficient to support the conviction.
• United States v. Santa-Manzano
  842 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1988-03-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the indictment charged a scheme to sell fake certificates of deposit to buyers, but the evidence proved a scheme to placate a victim with fake certificates after obtaining his money. This variance between the indictment and the proof was material and constitut
• United States v. Potts
  840 F.2d 368· 7th Cir.· 1987-08-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting hearsay statements under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(E), evidence of prior drug smuggling under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), or the defendant's prior written statements.
• Klaus Zoelsch v. Arthur Andersen & Co.
  824 F.2d 27· D.C. Cir.· 1987-07-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that domestic conduct is insufficient for subject matter jurisdiction over securities fraud claims when it does not directly cause losses to foreign investors, and the conduct was merely preparatory to the fraud.
• United States v. Taylor
  821 F.2d 1377· 9th Cir.· 1987-07-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the indictment with prejudice due to Speedy Trial Act violations.
• Orloff v. Allman
  819 F.2d 904· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-12 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment, holding that the plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence to establish the defendant's liability as a controlling person, aider and abettor, or alter ego.
• Cumper v. State
  506 So. 2d 89· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-05-01 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the judgment and sentence for sexual battery on a child under eleven years of age.
• United States v. Arbelaez
  812 F.2d 530· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a defendant cannot be punished for both conspiracy and the underlying substantive offenses if they are not distinct under the Blockburger test, and that separate sentences for aiding and abetting possession and distribution are impermissible when arising from
• Feldman v. Pioneer Petroleum, Inc.
  813 F.2d 296· 10th Cir.· 1987-03-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence of actual damages, which is a fatal defect for their federal securities fraud and common law fraud claims.
• United States v. Lueben
  812 F.2d 179· 5th Cir.· 1987-02-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that excluding expert testimony on the materiality of false statements was an error that required reversal of convictions for making false statements, aiding and abetting, and conspiracy.
• United States v. Powell
  806 F.2d 1421· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while evidentiary errors were harmless, the defendant was entitled to acquittal on false certification counts because he was not a 'transferor' under the statute without an ownership interest in the vehicles.
• United States v. Carter
  801 F.2d 78· 2d Cir.· 1986-09-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendants of dealing in firearms without a license and affirmed the judgments of conviction.
• United States v. Vamos
  797 F.2d 1146· 2d Cir.· 1986-07-31 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding the defendant competent to stand trial and that the jury instructions regarding dispensing controlled substances and falsifying records were proper.
• Saylor v. State
  491 So. 2d 340· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-07-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to establish a conspiracy, as it only supported aiding and abetting.
• United States v. Pendegraph
  791 F.2d 1462· 11th Cir.· 1986-06-23 ·cited 12×
  The admission of a redacted co-defendant's statement was a Bruton violation for armed bank robbery, but harmless error for simple bank robbery, as there was other evidence of guilt for the lesser offense.
• United States v. Smith
  788 F.2d 663· 10th Cir.· 1986-04-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the superseding indictment was not fatally defective despite a change in the administrative title of the National Credit Union Administration, and that the denial of severance motions was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Vernon Owen Vannerson (85-1507)
  786 F.2d 221· 6th Cir.· 1986-03-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence, including the defendants' sudden unexplained wealth and false explanations for its source, was sufficient to support their convictions for bank theft and concealing stolen funds.
• United States v. Glasser
  773 F.2d 1553· 11th Cir.· 1985-10-18 ·cited 12×
  The court held that delays from intra-district case transfers are excludable under the Speedy Trial Act, and that evidentiary errors were harmless.
• United States v. Allen C. Lawson (84-3798)
  780 F.2d 535· 6th Cir.· 1985-10-16 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the jury convictions, holding that the electronic surveillance was lawfully authorized and properly minimized, cross-examination was not improperly limited, telephone records were admissible, the evidence was sufficient for conviction, preindictment delay did n
• United States v. Geary David Powell
  771 F.2d 1173· 8th Cir.· 1985-09-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for a mistrial based on prosecutorial misconduct and prejudicial publicity, nor was there insufficient evidence to support the convictions.
• Riner v. Owens
  764 F.2d 1253· 7th Cir.· 1985-06-14 ·cited 12×
  The majority holds that the petitioner demonstrated sufficient cause and prejudice to overcome waiver of his Sixth Amendment claim. The dissenting judge would hold that the petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice and thus the claim should be denied.
• United States ex rel. Fred Reed v. Lane
  759 F.2d 618· 7th Cir.· 1985-04-10 ·cited 12×
  The dissenting judge believes the petitioner had adequate notice that the compulsion defense would not be available due to his participation in a second murder.