Aiding And Abetting

3,842 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 164 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Braxton Lake Freeman
  579 F.2d 942· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-11 ·cited 83×
  Customs officers acting under 19 U.S.C. § 1581(a) can board vessels in customs waters for routine document checks without suspicion, and observations during such a lawful boarding can establish probable cause for a subsequent search.
• United States v. Grady
  544 F.2d 598· 2d Cir.· 1976-10-27 ·cited 83×
  The court held that the superseding indictment was not time-barred, the false entries statute was violated, Irish police records were admissible, subsequent similar acts testimony was properly admitted, and jury instructions on aiding and abetting unlawful export were adequate.
• Donald W. Buttrey in Bankr. for Dobich Sec. Corp. v. Merrill Lynch
  410 F.2d 135· 7th Cir.· 1969-04-17 ·cited 83×
  The court held that a bankruptcy trustee can prosecute claims for fraudulent transfers under federal law, and that alleged violations of NYSE Rule 405 and federal securities laws stated actionable claims.
• United States v. Francomano
  554 F.2d 483· 1st Cir.· 1977-05-03 ·cited 82×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support a jury finding that the appellants knowingly and intentionally attempted to import marihuana or aided and abetted such an attempt.
• United States v. Prout
  526 F.2d 380· 5th Cir.· 1976-01-26 ·cited 82×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conspiracy and distribution convictions, the search warrant for the premises was valid, and the government's failure to disclose all details of a witness's deal was harmless error.
• United States v. Umans
  368 F.2d 725· 2d Cir.· 1966-10-27 ·cited 82×
  The court held that while the omission of jury instructions regarding the criminal intent of IRS agents was an error, it was not prejudicial given the agents' guilty pleas and testimony. The court also vacated convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 201(f) as a lesser included offense.
• McCoy v. State
  40 Fla. 494· Fla.· 1898-06-01 ·cited 82×
  McCoy and Thomas were convicted of murder in the third degree for the killing of Tuck George. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that although the evidence supported a conviction for at least murder in the second degree, the jury's verdict for the lesser d
• United States v. Hoyle Lamont Peacock
  654 F.2d 339· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-27 ·cited 81×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to convict Vera Peacock of one arson, and Harvey and Hoyle Peacock of the murder of Ruth Elaine Peacock. The court also reversed the forfeiture order.
• United States v. Lawson
  507 F.2d 433· 7th Cir.· 1974-11-26 ·cited 81×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying a mistrial after inadmissible evidence was displayed, nor in refusing to define reasonable doubt, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• United States v. Martinez
  466 F.2d 679· 5th Cir.· 1972-09-11 ·cited 81×
  The court held that the jury charge allowing an inference that securities were stolen from the mails based on possession of stolen securities and knowledge of their stolen character was error.
• United States v. Gonzalez-Sanchez
  825 F.2d 572· 1st Cir.· 1987-07-31 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in finding a defendant breached his plea agreement, that evidence of prior crimes was largely admissible under Rule 404(b), but that evidence admitted against one defendant violated collateral estoppel and required reversal.
• Barker v. Henderson
  797 F.2d 490· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-30 ·cited 80×
  Law firms and accountants are not liable under securities laws for negligence or malpractice; liability requires scienter and a duty to disclose, which were not present here.
• Chem. Bank v. Arthur Andersen & Co.
  726 F.2d 930· 2d Cir.· 1984-01-20 ·cited 80×
  Commercial bank loans for current operations, even if evidenced by notes with maturities exceeding nine months, are generally not considered securities under the federal securities laws. A pledge of stock can constitute a sale for securities law purposes.
• United States v. Walsh
  700 F.2d 846· 2d Cir.· 1983-02-11 ·cited 80×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that sufficient evidence supported the RICO and Travel Act convictions, and that the statute of limitations defense was waived.
• United States v. Sterling Hamilton
  689 F.2d 1262· 6th Cir.· 1982-09-28 ·cited 80×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that taped conversations were admissible under the coconspirator exception to the hearsay rule and that the evidence was sufficient to convict defendants of dealing in explosives without a license.
• United States v. Walton
  552 F.2d 1354· 10th Cir.· 1977-03-14 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for severance, nor did it commit plain error regarding comments on the defendants' failure to testify or limitations on cross-examination.
• United States v. Parness
  503 F.2d 430· 2d Cir.· 1974-06-27 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the RICO statute applied to the acquisition of a foreign corporation through criminal acts affecting U.S. commerce, and that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague.
• United States v. Graham
  391 F.2d 439· 6th Cir.· 1968-02-26 ·cited 80×
  The court held that examining serial numbers on impounded vehicles is not an illegal search, and appellants lacked standing to challenge the search of cars they did not possess. However, police reports containing hearsay are inadmissible under the Federal Business Records Act to
• United States v. Boy McKINNEY
  379 F.2d 259· 6th Cir.· 1967-06-26 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the admission of a co-defendant's statement, made in the appellant's presence and silence, violated the appellant's Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, requiring reversal. However, a search warrant is not necessary to execute an arrest warrant in
• United States v. Turner
  871 F.2d 1574· 11th Cir.· 1989-05-09 ·cited 79×
  The court held that the jury instructions were accurate, the discovery violation did not prejudice the defendant, and the admission of coconspirator statements was either proper or harmless error.
• United States v. Musser
  856 F.2d 1484· 11th Cir.· 1988-10-04 ·cited 79×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that there was sufficient evidence for aiding and abetting, the prosecutor's arguments were proper or invited error, and the sentencing provisions of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act were constitutional.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. The Seaboard Corp.
  677 F.2d 1301· 9th Cir.· 1982-05-24 ·cited 79×·via Aiding And Abetting Liability
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted on the § 10(b) claim due to a disputed issue of fact regarding the statute of limitations, but affirmed summary judgment on other claims based on the statute of limitations and the court's finding that the prospectus was
• United States v. Ubaldo Trevino and Ramiro Gonzalez
  556 F.2d 1265· 5th Cir.· 1977-08-03 ·cited 79×
  The court held that the presentence report was not discoverable under the Jencks Act, Brady, or Rule 16 because these provisions are directed toward evidence in the hands of the prosecutor.
• United States v. Otto Archbold-Newball
  554 F.2d 665· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-22 ·cited 79×
  The court held that statements made by the appellants to an undercover agent in Martinique were admissible as co-conspirator hearsay and did not violate their Fifth or Sixth Amendment rights because they were not in custody for Miranda purposes and the right to counsel had not ye
• United States v. Richardson
  764 F.2d 1514· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-12 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the government's use of a confidential informant did not constitute overreaching, evidence of prior bad acts was admissible, taped conversations were properly admitted, the evidence was sufficient to support convictions, and a variance between the indictment a
• United States v. Garrett
  727 F.2d 1003· 11th Cir.· 1984-03-02 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the disqualification of retained counsel was permissible under the Sixth Amendment, double jeopardy did not bar prosecution for continuing criminal enterprise after a conviction for a predicate offense, and the restriction of cross-examination was proper. Howe
• IIT v. Cornfeld
  619 F.2d 909· 2d Cir.· 1980-03-17 ·cited 78×
  The court held that subject-matter jurisdiction exists for claims arising from the purchase of American securities (KRC common stock and TCC convertible note) consummated within the United States, and for KRCC convertible debentures which were essentially American securities desp
• United States v. Fearns
  501 F.2d 486· 7th Cir.· 1974-08-12 ·cited 78×
  The court held that prosecutorial misconduct in arguing facts not in evidence, specifically referencing a witness's prior statement not admitted, constituted plain error requiring reversal.
• United States v. Musgrave
  483 F.2d 327· 5th Cir.· 1973-06-29 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its rulings and instructions, affirming the convictions.
• United States v. Cooper
  464 F.2d 648· 10th Cir.· 1972-07-12 ·cited 78×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdicts and rejecting numerous procedural and evidentiary challenges raised by the appellants.
• United States v. COX
  449 F.2d 679· 10th Cir.· 1971-10-13 ·cited 78×
  The court held that 18 U.S.C. § 2517(5) is constitutional, allowing the use of intercepted communications relating to offenses other than those specified in the original authorization, provided a judge approves their use. The court also found that the admission of intercepted con
• United States v. Harris
  441 F.2d 1333· 10th Cir.· 1971-05-13 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in overruling motions for mistrial, continuance, severance, or acquittal, and that the defendants received a fair trial.
• United States v. Tutino
  269 F.2d 488· 2d Cir.· 1959-07-21 ·cited 78×
  The court held that there was substantial evidence to support the conviction for conspiracy to illegally sell narcotics.
• United States v. Jones
  913 F.2d 1552· 11th Cir.· 1990-10-11 ·cited 77×
  The court held that the evidence presented was sufficient to sustain the convictions of all defendants for conspiracy and possession of cocaine with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Janyce Carter
  720 F.2d 941· 7th Cir.· 1983-11-07 ·cited 77×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction and sentence for participating in an unauthorized loan of postage stamps and attempting to conceal it were supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion.
• J. H. v. State
  370 So. 2d 1219· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-05-15 ·cited 77×
  J.H., a juvenile, was adjudicated delinquent for robbery based on aiding and abetting. The court reversed, finding the evidence insufficient to prove J.H. intended to participate in the crime, as he merely happened to be present and fled after the robbery was committed.
• Rochez Bros., Inc. v. Rhoades
  491 F.2d 402· 3d Cir.· 1973-12-21 ·cited 77×
• Lowell Lyons v. United States
  325 F.2d 370· 9th Cir.· 1963-11-20 ·cited 77×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit plain or reversible error in its jury instructions or in denying motions for disqualification and transfer, and that the appellant received adequate representation.
• United States v. Roberto José Maldonado-Rivera
  922 F.2d 934· 2d Cir.· 1990-12-12 ·cited 76×
  The court affirmed convictions for most defendants, vacating one conviction due to sentencing error, and rejected challenges to the admissibility of electronic surveillance tapes.
• United States v. Phillips
  640 F.2d 87· 7th Cir.· 1981-02-06 ·cited 76×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motion for a mistrial, denying his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, admitting certain evidence, or imposing consecutive sentences.
• United States v. Buttorff
  572 F.2d 619· 8th Cir.· 1978-02-28 ·cited 76×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for aiding and abetting the filing of false tax withholding forms, and that the defendants' speech, which went beyond mere advocacy and explained evasion methods, was not protected by the First Amendment.
• Wheeler v. United States
  382 F.2d 998· 10th Cir.· 1967-09-18 ·cited 76×·via Aider And Abettor
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not err in its rulings regarding jury instructions, admission of evidence, or venue.
• United States v. Carlo P. Minieri and Salvatore Saponaro
  303 F.2d 550· 2d Cir.· 1962-05-31 ·cited 76×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict Minieri of possessing stolen goods, but insufficient evidence to convict Saponaro of possession or aiding and abetting.
• Karrell v. United States
  181 F.2d 981· 9th Cir.· 1950-04-24 ·cited 76×
  The court held that restitution ordered as a condition of probation must be limited to losses directly caused by the offense of conviction, and the amount of restitution is the difference between the appraised value and the actual purchase price.
• Baumann v. United States
  692 F.2d 565· 9th Cir.· 1982-10-27 ·cited 75×
  The court held that the indictment was not defective and that the district court properly rejected the duplicity claim on the merits. It also reversed summary dismissal of the Brady claim.
• United States v. Soto
  591 F.2d 1091· 5th Cir.· 1979-03-22 ·cited 75×·via Aider And Abettor Liability
  The court held that while evidence was sufficient for possession convictions, it was insufficient for importation convictions for some appellants and all convictions for two others. Motions to suppress were properly denied, and marijuana samples were admissible.
• United States v. Gallagher
  576 F.2d 1028· 3d Cir.· 1978-05-05 ·cited 75×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendants of conspiracy and substantive offenses related to bank fraud, and that the trial judge's conduct did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Mays
  549 F.2d 670· 9th Cir.· 1977-03-03 ·cited 75×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority erred in finding no actual prejudice from the pre-indictment delay, arguing that the unavailability of critical witnesses due to the delay unfairly impairs the defendants' ability to reconstruct events and defend themselves.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Coffey
  493 F.2d 1304· 6th Cir.· 1974-03-28 ·cited 75×·via Aiding And Abetting Liability
  The court held that corporate officials cannot be personally enjoined for corporate securities law violations unless they personally committed or knowingly participated in the violation. The court reversed the injunction against the appellants, finding no evidence of a fraudulent
• United States v. Allied Stevedoring Corp.
  241 F.2d 925· 2d Cir.· 1957-02-04 ·cited 75×