Aiding And Abetting

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

• United States v. Elliott
  771 F.2d 1046· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support convictions for mail fraud and making false statements to government agencies, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or denial of a bill of particulars.
• United States v. Saterdalen
  769 F.2d 494· 8th Cir.· 1985-08-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in failing to hold an evidentiary hearing regarding the co-defendant's testimony, as the plea agreement was not contingent on the outcome of the prosecution.
• United States v. Busch
  758 F.2d 1394· 10th Cir.· 1985-04-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the admission of tape-recorded statements was proper and that the defendants were charged under the correct statute, affirming their convictions.
• United States v. Kasvin
  757 F.2d 887· 7th Cir.· 1985-03-13 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the business records were admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence and that the evidence supported the conviction for conspiracy, either as a member or as an aider and abettor.
• United States v. Ellis
  747 F.2d 1205· 8th Cir.· 1984-11-06 ·cited 6×
  The court vacated the conviction for unlawful receipt of firearms and affirmed the convictions for aiding and abetting unlawful receipt and aiding and abetting dealing in firearms without a license.
• United States v. Fathi Assi
  748 F.2d 62· 2d Cir.· 1984-10-17 ·cited 6×
• United States v. Merritt
  736 F.2d 223· 5th Cir.· 1984-06-29 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed convictions for four defendants and judgments of acquittal for two others, finding sufficient evidence and proper procedure in most instances, while reversing acquittals due to insufficient evidence for two crew members.
• Paulson v. Black
  728 F.2d 1164· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-07 ·cited 6×
  A guilty plea is valid if the defendant understands the nature of the charge, even if they do not admit guilt, and the trial court adequately informed them of the charge and its consequences.
• United States v. Patterson
  724 F.2d 1128· 5th Cir.· 1984-01-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the defendant's request for a government-funded fingerprint expert, as such services were necessary for an adequate defense when the government's case relied heavily on fingerprint evidence.
• United States v. Hernandez
  715 F.2d 548· 11th Cir.· 1983-09-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the arrests were lawful under federal common law, affirming the convictions.
• Crawford v. Sheriff OF Orange Cnty.
  441 So. 2d 646· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-07-14 ·cited 6×
  Crawford and Wilson appealed the forfeiture of a pickup truck under Florida's forfeiture statute, challenging whether the vehicle was used as an instrumentality in committing a felony. The court reversed the forfeiture, holding that the sheriff failed to present sufficient eviden
• Adolfo Dolmetta and Vittorio Coda v. Uintah Nat'l Corp.
  712 F.2d 15· 2d Cir.· 1983-06-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the first cause of action for constructive trust was not time-barred, but the remaining six causes of action were. The dismissal of the first cause of action is reversed and remanded.
• United States v. Kolenda
  697 F.2d 149· 6th Cir.· 1983-01-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Government sufficiently proved the substance was a Schedule II controlled substance and that the district court did not err in reopening proof or giving jury instructions.
• United States v. Upshaw
  685 F.2d 1202· 9th Cir.· 1982-12-29 ·cited 6×
  An apparent inconsistency between a jury's conviction of a defendant and the acquittal of a co-defendant does not, by itself, invalidate the conviction, especially under the aiding and abetting statute.
• United States v. Valavanis
  689 F.2d 626· 6th Cir.· 1982-09-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain mail fraud convictions, as it demonstrated a scheme to defraud and the use of the mails in furtherance of that scheme.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. The Seaboard Corp.
  677 F.2d 1315· 9th Cir.· 1982-05-24 ·cited 6×
  Dismissal with prejudice under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) was proper because the cross-claim failed to allege sufficient facts demonstrating the bank's knowledge and participation in the alleged fraud.
• Capo v. State
  406 So. 2d 1242· Fla. 1st DCA· 1981-12-08 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of other criminal activity.
• United States v. McMURRAY
  680 F.2d 695· 10th Cir.· 1981-02-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendants were involved in a single conspiracy, not multiple conspiracies, and therefore their retrial on separate indictments violated double jeopardy protections.
• United States v. Domingo Martinez-Morales
  632 F.2d 112· 9th Cir.· 1980-11-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government's return of a co-defendant to Mexico did not violate the defendant's Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights because the government was unaware of the co-defendant's potential materiality to the charges at the time of his return.
• United States v. Hampton
  633 F.2d 927· 10th Cir.· 1980-10-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that inaccuracies in a search warrant affidavit, specifically misattributing a confession to the wrong agent, were not fatal to the warrant's validity when the content was accurate and other corroborating information supported probable cause.
• Oleck v. Fischer
  623 F.2d 791· 2d Cir.· 1980-06-04 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the judgment for the defendant, finding that the trial court's determination that the plaintiffs failed to prove scienter or reckless disregard for the truth was reasonably supported by the evidence.
• United States v. Arthuro Montano
  613 F.2d 147· 6th Cir.· 1980-01-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the suitcase was not justified by exigent circumstances and violated the Fourth Amendment, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Kail
  612 F.2d 443· 9th Cir.· 1979-11-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the wiretap order was legal, preindictment delay did not violate due process, and the use of a pen register did not require separate authorization. The evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Wood
  609 F.2d 246· 6th Cir.· 1979-10-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction was not a violation of double jeopardy and that evidence obtained from a search was admissible.
• United States v. Umbower
  602 F.2d 754· 5th Cir.· 1979-09-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's appearance before a magistrate in a district without jurisdiction over the pending charges did not constitute 'arrival' in the receiving state under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers, nor did it trigger the Speedy Trial Act's ten-day arraig
• Lowery v. State
  375 So. 2d 1075· Fla. 4th DCA· 1979-06-13 ·cited 6×
• Stephenson v. State
  371 So. 2d 554· Fla. 2d DCA· 1979-05-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the facts were sufficient to establish a prima facie case for sale of marijuana, but not for possession.
• United States v. Gaby Habib Semaan
  594 F.2d 1215· 8th Cir.· 1979-03-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of prior misconduct, in its jury instructions, or in its handling of a jury question during deliberations.
• United States v. Steinkoetter
  593 F.2d 747· 6th Cir.· 1979-02-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that highly prejudicial prosecutorial misconduct in an opening statement warrants vacating the conviction and remanding for a new trial.
• United States v. Murry
  588 F.2d 641· 8th Cir.· 1978-12-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that taking a letter from a mail carrier's possession before it reaches the addressee or their authorized agent violates 18 U.S.C. § 1702, but mere possession of stolen mail after the theft is complete does not.
• United States v. Adelbert Lone Bear and Merceline Cynthia Red Boy
  579 F.2d 522· 9th Cir.· 1978-07-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government does not need to prove the victim was not the defendant's wife in a federal rape prosecution under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 and 2031, unless the defendant raises such a defense.
• United States v. Benson Joseph Donoho
  575 F.2d 718· 9th Cir.· 1978-05-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that character evidence is not an essential element of the entrapment defense and that a prior misdemeanor conviction for theft involving dishonesty is admissible for impeachment.
• United States v. Gutierrez
  576 F.2d 269· 10th Cir.· 1978-05-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdicts against Gutierrez and Zamora for conspiracy to distribute heroin, and that the trial court did not err in admitting challenged evidence or denying severance.
• Busch v. State
  355 So. 2d 488· Fla. 1st DCA· 1978-02-27 ·cited 6×
  The appellant challenged his armed robbery conviction on two grounds: that his confession was obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment through a warrantless home arrest, and that he could not be convicted of armed robbery when he did not physically possess the firearm. The c
• United States v. Markley
  567 F.2d 523· 1st Cir.· 1977-12-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the homemade devices, consisting of cardboard tubes with black powder and fuses, qualified as 'destructive devices' under 26 U.S.C. § 5845(f) and that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague. The jury instructions were adequate.
• United States v. Gallagher
  565 F.2d 981· 7th Cir.· 1977-11-28 ·cited 6×
  A defendant cannot be convicted of aiding and abetting possession of stolen securities if their involvement was limited to attempting to purchase them from the possessor, without exercising dominion or control over the securities themselves.
• Feeney v. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  564 F.2d 260· 8th Cir.· 1977-11-03 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the Securities and Exchange Commission's findings that petitioners willfully violated anti-fraud and registration provisions of the Securities Act and that the Commission did not err in refusing to provide appointed counsel.
• United States v. Colon
  559 F.2d 1380· 5th Cir.· 1977-10-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the search warrant was void because the affidavit supporting it was insufficient to establish probable cause under the Fourth Amendment.
• Earnest v. State
  342 So. 2d 1024· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-02-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a conviction for armed robbery, even without personal possession of a firearm, is sufficient to trigger the mandatory minimum sentence under Section 775.087(2), Florida Statutes.
• United States v. Schwartz
  548 F.2d 427· 2d Cir.· 1977-01-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for using extortionate means to collect extensions of credit, and that the prosecutor's use of the term 'Mafia' did not prejudice the trial.
• United States v. Van Meerbeke
  548 F.2d 415· 2d Cir.· 1976-12-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while the trial judge's silence regarding a witness's drug use was an error, it did not affect the judgment in this specific case.
• United States v. Partee
  546 F.2d 1322· 8th Cir.· 1976-12-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's claims regarding jury exclusion and the admission of evidence concerning his wife's criminal activity were without merit.
• United States v. Falcone
  544 F.2d 607· 2d Cir.· 1976-11-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions for bankruptcy fraud and that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for judgment of acquittal.
• United States v. Harris
  533 F.2d 306· 5th Cir.· 1976-06-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the jury charge regarding good reputation, which stated it should not excuse acquittal if guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, constituted reversible error.
• United States v. Young
  527 F.2d 1334· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction for theft was valid, affirming the trial court's decisions regarding suppression, confessions, entrapment, indictment, evidence, and jury instructions.
• United States v. Parker
  530 F.2d 208· 8th Cir.· 1976-02-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant lacked standing to challenge the seizure of evidence from co-defendants and that his waiver of a jury trial was voluntary and intelligent.
• United States v. Stewart
  523 F.2d 1263· 2d Cir.· 1975-10-01 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the conviction but remanded for re-sentencing because the district court improperly imposed a sentence that was the sum of the maximum penalties for two subsections of the bank robbery statute.
• United States v. Owens
  528 F.2d 1176· 4th Cir.· 1975-09-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that any errors in denying a defendant's request to testify outside the jury's presence regarding statement voluntariness, or in a photographic display, or in denying a subpoena for a witness, were harmless.
• United States v. Jones
  517 F.2d 176· D.C. Cir.· 1975-08-08 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no merit in the challenges to the identification evidence, sufficiency of evidence, supplemental jury instruction, or impeachment by prior conviction.
• Yeomans v. Commonwealth OF Ky.
  514 F.2d 993· 6th Cir.· 1975-04-28 ·cited 6×
  A state's entry into the congressionally regulated area of securities, even if negligent or exceeding regulatory functions, does not constitute an implied waiver of Eleventh Amendment immunity.