Aiding And Abetting

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

• United States v. Phanuel J. Hamilton
  726 F.2d 317· 7th Cir.· 1984-01-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that knowledge of the federal origin of funds is not an element of the offense under 18 U.S.C. § 665(a), and that a sufficient federal nexus was established through the reimbursement process.
• United States v. Fields
  722 F.2d 549· 9th Cir.· 1983-12-27 ·cited 8×
  The court holds that it has jurisdiction to review a denial of investigative funds on appeal from a final conviction.
• United States v. Poole
  718 F.2d 671· 4th Cir.· 1983-10-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the search of the automobile was unconstitutional because it was not justified by a warrant or a recognized exception to the warrant requirement, specifically the automobile exception, as there was no exigency.
• Jackson v. State
  436 So. 2d 1085· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-09-06 ·cited 8×
  The court reversed a conviction for aiding and abetting a robbery, finding the evidence insufficient to prove the defendant's prior knowledge or intent to participate in the offense. The opinion highlights the state's failure to charge the defendant with a crime supported by the
• Vaughn Beasley Cordle v. State
  435 So. 2d 902· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-07-18 ·cited 8×
  Four appellants convicted of possession of marijuana in excess of 20 grams challenged their convictions on multiple grounds, including alleged invalidity of the search warrant, improper exhibition of excluded evidence to the jury, identification testimony errors, and insufficient
• State v. Pastorius
  419 So. 2d 1137· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-09-22 ·cited 8×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the dismissal of a drug delivery charge against Debra Morris Pastorius, holding that the undisputed facts were sufficient to establish a prima facie case of aiding and abetting in cannabis delivery based on her conduct in the transacti
• United States v. Phillips
  688 F.2d 52· 8th Cir.· 1982-09-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that cashing fraudulent money order drafts after transmission can constitute aiding and abetting wire fraud, and that statements made during non-custodial interviews are admissible without Miranda warnings.
• In the Interest of G. B. S.
  417 So. 2d 1181· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-09-01 ·cited 8×
  A juvenile was charged with grand theft and battery in connection with a purse snatching. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed his conviction, holding that circumstantial evidence of his presence at the scene, possession of victim's property, and flight supported guilt as
• United States v. Johnston
  685 F.2d 934· 5th Cir.· 1982-08-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant received a fair trial and affirmed his conviction, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on jury bias, pretrial motions, evidence suppression, sufficiency of evidence, jury instructions, prosecutorial misconduct, or grand jury
• Sobel v. State
  410 So. 2d 556· Fla. 4th DCA· 1982-02-10 ·cited 8×
  Florida appellate court affirmed first-degree murder conviction of aider and abettor despite principal's conviction for second-degree murder, holding that an aider and abettor can be convicted of a higher degree of murder than the principal when the aider and abettor is a princip
• United States v. Nunez
  668 F.2d 10· 1st Cir.· 1981-12-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the indictment's date specificity was sufficient and that the appellants' other claims lacked merit.
• United States v. Mueller
  663 F.2d 811· 8th Cir.· 1981-11-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant of aiding and abetting prostitution and that the trial court's findings were not inconsistent.
• United States v. Goldstein
  695 F.2d 1228· 10th Cir.· 1981-05-22 ·cited 8×
  Convictions for mail fraud and false statements are affirmed, but convictions for distributing controlled substances from an unregistered location are reversed because the conduct did not fall outside legitimate professional practice.
• United States v. Powell
  632 F.2d 754· 9th Cir.· 1980-10-03 ·cited 8×
  The denial of a pretrial motion to dismiss an indictment on double jeopardy grounds is appealable, but the denial of a motion to strike overt acts is not. An acquittal on a possession charge does not collaterally estop a conspiracy charge if the jury could have found guilt on the
• United States v. Phillips
  630 F.2d 1138· 6th Cir.· 1980-09-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance for the defendant's wife's testimony, as her availability, willingness to testify, and the favorability of her testimony were all uncertain.
• United States v. Emmanuel "Manny" Loucas
  629 F.2d 989· 4th Cir.· 1980-09-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction under the Travel Act and that the district court did not err in refusing to strike four jurors for cause.
• United States v. Sacks
  620 F.2d 239· 10th Cir.· 1980-04-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for aiding and abetting a distribution of cocaine, as the defendant's affirmative conduct and statements demonstrated his intent to further the crime.
• United States v. Scannapieco
  611 F.2d 619· 5th Cir.· 1980-02-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague as applied to an employee and that the jury instructions were proper.
• United States v. Longee
  603 F.2d 1342· 9th Cir.· 1979-06-25 ·cited 8×
  The admission of one defendant's out-of-court statement inculpating a co-defendant, when the declarant does not testify, violates the Confrontation Clause and constitutes plain error, requiring reversal of the co-defendant's conviction.
• United States v. Vissars
  596 F.2d 400· 9th Cir.· 1979-05-07 ·cited 8×
• United States v. Killebrew
  594 F.2d 1103· 6th Cir.· 1979-03-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the arrest was based on probable cause, hearsay evidence was admissible at the suppression hearing, and there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction.
• United States v. Eisenberg
  596 F.2d 522· 2d Cir.· 1979-03-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction for conspiracy and aiding and abetting the transportation of counterfeit checks, and that the admission of certain hearsay testimony and the jury instructions were proper.
• Gov't OF the Canal Zone v. Sixto O'Calagan C. (Cerezo)
  580 F.2d 161· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for aiding and abetting possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, and that the district court had jurisdiction.
• United States v. Ferrara
  571 F.2d 428· 8th Cir.· 1978-02-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendants' fraudulent scheme to obtain goods, which led to their interstate transportation, constituted a 'taking by fraud' that preceded the transportation, satisfying the requirements of the National Stolen Property Act.
• United States v. Grezo
  566 F.2d 854· 2d Cir.· 1977-12-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that independent bookmakers who regularly place substantial layoff bets with a gambling business are considered to 'conduct' that business under 18 U.S.C. § 1955, and that the evidence presented was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Warwick Mason Wyatt
  561 F.2d 1388· 4th Cir.· 1977-08-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that statements made by the defendant during transport after Miranda warnings were admissible as he knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to remain silent, and that a notebook seized incident to his arrest was also admissible.
• United States v. VAN Horn
  553 F.2d 1092· 8th Cir.· 1977-04-04 ·cited 8×
  The petition for rehearing is denied because counsel had an opportunity to object to jury instructions but failed to do so on substantive grounds.
• Gov't OF the Virgin Islands v. Leonard
  548 F.2d 478· 3d Cir.· 1977-01-24 ·cited 8×
  A conviction for embezzlement cannot stand if the evidence only supports larceny, as the Virgin Islands Code distinguishes between the two crimes.
• Dwyne Crittendon v. State
  338 So. 2d 1088· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-10-11 ·cited 8×
  Dwyne Crittendon was convicted of second-degree murder for his role in killing Stephen Anthony Orlando. On appeal, Crittendon challenged whether venue was properly laid in Duval County when the actual shooting occurred in St. Johns County. The court held that venue was proper bec
• United States v. KUH
  541 F.2d 672· 7th Cir.· 1976-09-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the misprision of felony statute, 18 U.S.C. § 4, could not be constitutionally applied to the defendants because their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination protected them from being compelled to report a crime they were simultaneously committin
• Weisser v. Ciccone
  532 F.2d 101· 8th Cir.· 1976-03-09 ·cited 8×
• McCLAMROCK v. State
  327 So. 2d 780· Fla. 3d DCA· 1975-12-09 ·cited 8×
  Audrey McClamrock was convicted of second-degree murder as an aider and abettor in the shooting death of her ex-husband by her current husband. The appellate court affirmed her conviction and life sentence, finding sufficient evidence of her intent to participate in the crime des
• Alice v. Herrlein
  526 F.2d 252· 7th Cir.· 1975-11-25 ·cited 8×
  A nonparty cannot be held in contempt for violating an injunction unless they are in active concert or participation with a party, or are a successor in interest to property subject to the injunction and the transfer was made to evade the injunction.
• Sonny Marshall and Silvia P. Hanson v. State
  321 So. 2d 114· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-10-31 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to allow defense counsel to inspect notes used by a prosecution witness to refresh memory, nor in denying a motion for judgment of acquittal.
• United States v. Marzell Peterson
  522 F.2d 661· D.C. Cir.· 1975-07-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury could permissibly infer knowledge of stolen property from unexplained possession and that evidence seized during a hot pursuit was admissible.
• United States v. Sarullo
  510 F.2d 1174· 6th Cir.· 1975-02-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that collateral estoppel did not bar the prosecution because the transactions and conspiracies charged in the two indictments were distinct.
• United States v. Bailey
  509 F.2d 881· 4th Cir.· 1975-01-31 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the guilty verdicts but remanded sentencing for certain defendants to allow consideration under the Federal Youth Corrections Act or related provisions.
• United States v. Munn
  507 F.2d 563· 10th Cir.· 1974-12-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for acquittal, nor in sequestering the defendant, and that the larceny conviction merged with the robbery conviction.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. First Sec. Co. OF Chicago
  507 F.2d 417· 7th Cir.· 1974-11-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that escrow claimants are not 'customers' under section 60(e) of the Bankruptcy Act and thus not entitled to priority in the Separate Fund. The court also reversed the allocation of a specific sum from the Continental Illinois transaction to the Separate Fund.
• United States v. Burton Gene Brierly
  501 F.2d 1024· 8th Cir.· 1974-08-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that an accomplice's assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege on cross-examination does not require striking his direct testimony if the questions relate to collateral matters or impeachment, and there is no substantial danger of prejudice.
• Flicker v. State
  296 So. 2d 109· Fla. 1st DCA· 1974-06-18 ·cited 8×
  The Flickers were charged with uttering and publishing forged mortgage satisfactions and forging a notarial attestation. The appellate court reversed their convictions, finding insufficient evidence that Elizabeth Flicker participated in any forgery and finding the evidence as to
• United States v. Burt McCRAY
  482 F.2d 286· 5th Cir.· 1973-07-23 ·cited 8×
  A defendant can be convicted of aiding and abetting the distribution of heroin even if they do not have a financial interest in the transaction or possess the drugs.
• United States v. Johnson
  484 F.2d 165· 9th Cir.· 1973-07-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury was justified in rejecting the entrapment defense and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions for conspiracy and distribution of heroin.
• United States v. Hawkins
  480 F.2d 1151· D.C. Cir.· 1973-06-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that improper prosecutorial arguments, comparing the insanity defense to infamous crimes and appealing to passion and prejudice, were so prejudicial as to require reversal of the convictions.
• Sennott v. Rodman & Renshaw
  474 F.2d 32· 7th Cir.· 1973-01-18 ·cited 8×
  A brokerage firm is not vicariously liable for a former associate's fraud when the victim did not rely on the firm's apparent authority and the firm lacked knowledge of the fraudulent scheme.
• United States v. Overton
  470 F.2d 761· 2d Cir.· 1972-12-12 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy to violate 29 U.S.C. § 186 and related substantive offenses, finding sufficient evidence and rejecting various procedural and legal challenges.
• United States v. Freeman B. Young
  465 F.2d 1096· 9th Cir.· 1972-08-17 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the materials were legally obscene and the convictions were supported by sufficient evidence, affirming the lower court's judgment.
• United States v. KEY
  458 F.2d 1189· 10th Cir.· 1972-04-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for transporting forged securities and that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial was not violated.
• United States v. Garrett
  457 F.2d 1311· 9th Cir.· 1972-04-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for unlawful possession of stolen mail was supported by sufficient evidence and that procedural errors did not warrant reversal.
• United States v. Erlenbaugh
  452 F.2d 967· 7th Cir.· 1971-11-30 ·cited 8×
  A newspaper or similar publication, even if exempt from 18 U.S.C. § 1953, can still constitute an interstate facility used to facilitate unlawful gambling activity under 18 U.S.C. § 1952.