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. Rahn
  511 F.2d 290· 10th Cir.· 1975-02-28 ·cited 69×
  The court held that the affidavit provided sufficient probable cause to believe that the weapons were located in the appellant's residence, rendering the search lawful.
• United States v. DYE
  508 F.2d 1226· 6th Cir.· 1974-08-22 ·cited 69×
  The court held that the denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion, the search of the U-Haul truck was lawful, and the failure to produce certain Jencks Act statements was harmless error.
• Neumann v. State
  116 Fla. 98· Fla.· 1934-08-04 ·cited 69×
  M. M. Neumann was convicted of two felony counts for aiding in the commission of dynamite explosion against a building. The Florida Supreme Court reversed because the information was fatally defective and vague—it failed to clearly distinguish whether Neumann was charged as a pri
• United States v. Rubiel Marin-Cifuentes
  866 F.2d 988· 8th Cir.· 1989-01-19 ·cited 68×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding no error in the admission of evidence, sufficiency of evidence, denial of severance, or sentencing.
• United States v. Medina
  755 F.2d 1269· 7th Cir.· 1985-01-30 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing a voluntary manslaughter instruction and in admitting certain testimony, but that the evidence was insufficient to support Medina's conviction for conveying weapons within the institution.
• United States v. Burnette
  698 F.2d 1038· 9th Cir.· 1983-02-10 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the evidence found in Lynette's purse was admissible because the police's extensive search of the purse at the time of arrest destroyed any reasonable expectation of privacy.
• United States v. Hitsman
  604 F.2d 443· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-15 ·cited 68×
  The court affirmed all convictions, finding sufficient evidence and no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on evidence, jury instructions, or motions.
• United States v. Valenzuela
  596 F.2d 1361· 9th Cir.· 1979-04-05 ·cited 68×
  The court held that concurrent sentences for lesser included offenses do not create an issue of excessive cumulative punishment when merged into a continuing criminal enterprise conviction, and that the search warrant execution and the continuing criminal enterprise statute were
• United States v. Arroyo-Angulo
  580 F.2d 1137· 2d Cir.· 1978-06-30 ·cited 68×
  The court held that in camera proceedings were justified by compelling security needs and did not violate defendants' Sixth Amendment rights, and that the use of a cooperating witness's agreement was permissible.
• United States v. Baldarrama
  566 F.2d 560· 5th Cir.· 1978-01-20 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy and aiding and abetting, and that the admission of a prior conviction was proper for showing identity. The court also found no reversible error in other evidentiary or procedural claims.
• United States v. Joseph D. Beasley, M.D.
  550 F.2d 261· 5th Cir.· 1977-04-08 ·cited 68×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no merit in the appellants' numerous assignments of error regarding the indictment's sufficiency, grand jury proceedings, disclosure of evidence, witness immunity, continuance requests, and federal jurisdiction over false claims submitt
• Jones v. United States
  251 F.2d 288· 10th Cir.· 1958-01-06 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish a conspiracy to import intoxicating liquor into Oklahoma, but not a conspiracy to carry on business without paying the required tax. The court reversed the conviction of one defendant for lack of evidence of his knowled
• United States v. Fagan
  821 F.2d 1002· 5th Cir.· 1987-06-30 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the mail fraud, witness intimidation, and interstate threat charges were properly joined and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• Woods v. Barnett Bank OF Fort Lauder-Dale
  765 F.2d 1004· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-15 ·cited 67×
  Barnett Bank is liable as an aider and abettor for securities fraud because its employee's "disastrously reckless" letter to the trustee bank constituted knowing and substantial assistance to the fraud, and the award of compensatory damages was affirmed.
• United States v. Campa
  679 F.2d 1006· 1st Cir.· 1982-05-27 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for aiding and abetting, that the display of unoffered tapes was not prejudicial, that prosecutorial comments were not improper, that a principal need not be identified or convicted, and that the defendant
• United States v. Mills
  597 F.2d 693· 9th Cir.· 1979-05-25 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the issue of vindictive sentencing could not be considered on appeal because the appellant relied on an affidavit not included in the record and failed to comply with Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 10(c).
• United States v. Greer
  467 F.2d 1064· 7th Cir.· 1972-08-18 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the prosecutor's remarks were invited by the defense counsel's statements and did not exceed the bounds of that invitation.
• United States v. Sanchez
  917 F.2d 607· 1st Cir.· 1990-10-24 ·cited 66×
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences, holding that conspiracy and possession evidence was sufficient, "aiding and abetting" and Pinkerton instructions were permissible without explicit indictment notice, ineffective assistance claims required a more developed record, and
• United States v. Cerone
  830 F.2d 938· 8th Cir.· 1987-10-08 ·cited 66×
  The court held that convictions for conspiracy and substantive Travel Act violations do not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause, and that jury instructions, while potentially confusing, constituted harmless error. The court also affirmed the admission of co-conspirator statements
• United States v. Buljubasic
  808 F.2d 1260· 7th Cir.· 1987-01-07 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying severance motions, that Pavlovic's double jeopardy claim was barred by his repeated motions for mistrial, and that Buljubasic's other claims of error were either harmless or without merit.
• United States v. McCRADY
  774 F.2d 868· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-01 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the car's glove compartment was a valid search incident to arrest under the Belton rule, and the subsequent apartment search was not tainted. The court also found the admission of the assistant U.S. attorney's testimony to be an abuse
• United States v. Herbert
  698 F.2d 981· 9th Cir.· 1983-02-07 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the jury selection plan was constitutional and a judge's comment was harmless error for one defendant, but reversed convictions for another due to an erroneous jury instruction on scienter that was not harmless.
• United States v. Mohinder Singh
  628 F.2d 758· 2d Cir.· 1980-06-12 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding a civil suit against a defendant was permissible to show witness bias, and that curtailment of cross-examination was proper when the jury had sufficient information to assess witness credibility.
• Smith v. United States
  230 F.2d 935· 6th Cir.· 1956-03-05 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the jury instructions on criminal intent and the defendant's defense were erroneous and prejudicial, requiring reversal of the convictions.
• Pereira v. United States
  202 F.2d 830· 5th Cir.· 1953-03-11 ·cited 65×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous, the offenses were distinct, the victim was competent to testify, and the statutory language regarding causing transportation was correctly interpreted.
• United States v. Garcia-Rosa
  876 F.2d 209· 1st Cir.· 1989-05-23 ·cited 64×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions and affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress. However, it found that the district court abused its discretion in admitting certain extrinsic act evidence.
• United States v. Sailes
  872 F.2d 735· 6th Cir.· 1989-04-13 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the district court did not err in calculating the defendant's base offense level by including the entire quantity of cocaine involved in the overall scheme, nor in refusing to depart from the sentencing guidelines.
• United States v. Shannon N. Mahar (85-1411)
  801 F.2d 1477· 6th Cir.· 1986-09-24 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for conspiracy to distribute controlled substances and mail fraud, but vacated convictions on two substantive counts due to insufficient evidence.
• United States v. Acosta
  763 F.2d 671· 5th Cir.· 1985-06-06 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a written jury charge and in admitting co-conspirator hearsay statements subject to later connection, but reversed convictions due to insufficient evidence or lack of venue.
• United States v. Tyler
  758 F.2d 66· 2d Cir.· 1985-03-26 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove a conspiracy but sufficient to prove aiding and abetting a drug distribution offense.
• United States v. Badolato
  701 F.2d 915· 11th Cir.· 1983-04-01 ·cited 64×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence of conspiracy and rejecting claims of evidentiary and procedural errors.
• Marbury Mgmt., Inc. v. Kohn
  629 F.2d 705· 2d Cir.· 1980-04-21 ·cited 64×
  The dissent argues that the majority's decision abandons traditional causation principles for fraud claims under federal securities acts, allowing recovery where the injury is not directly caused by the alleged wrong.
• Pack v. State
  381 So. 2d 1199· Fla. 2d DCA· 1980-03-28 ·cited 64×
  Ronnie Pack was convicted of armed robbery as an aider and abettor based solely on his presence at the scene and subsequent flight from police. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to prove the specific intent re
• United States v. Wilson
  451 F.2d 209· 5th Cir.· 1971-09-24 ·cited 64×
  The court affirmed all convictions, holding that altering genuine coins by restriking them with counterfeit dies constitutes counterfeiting, electronic eavesdropping was permissible, chain of custody was sufficient for evidence admission, and severance was not required.
• United States v. Harris
  435 F.2d 74· D.C. Cir.· 1970-08-12 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence presented was insufficient to support a conviction for aiding and abetting a payroll robbery, as it failed to prove the defendant's knowing participation.
• Feldstein v. United States
  429 F.2d 1092· 9th Cir.· 1970-06-22 ·cited 64×
  The court held that while the jury instructions regarding the presumption in 21 U.S.C. § 176a were erroneous and should not have been given, the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt in this case. Other claimed errors were also rejected.
• United States v. Andreadis
  366 F.2d 423· 2d Cir.· 1966-09-01 ·cited 64×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence that appellants knowingly used mail and wire communications to further a scheme to defraud by making false and misleading claims about 'Regimen Tablets'.
• Franklin v. United States
  330 F.2d 205· D.C. Cir.· 1963-12-12 ·cited 64×
  The court held that a conviction for rape requires corroboration of identity, and reversed the conviction of Franklin due to insufficient corroboration. The court affirmed the convictions of Brooks and Price.
• United States v. Gerald Levy (89-5980) & Calvin Black (89-6099)
  904 F.2d 1026· 6th Cir.· 1990-05-25 ·cited 63×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, holding that the district court did not err in its evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, or sentencing decisions, and that the challenged statute was not unconstitutionally vague or disproportionate.
• United States v. Slocum
  708 F.2d 587· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-27 ·cited 63×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy and substantive violations related to bird quarantine, finding sufficient evidence and rejecting claims of prosecutorial misconduct and insufficient customs custody. The court reversed the suppression of business records seized under
• United States v. Nolan
  700 F.2d 479· 9th Cir.· 1983-01-20 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying continuances or severance, properly admitted evidence regarding a co-defendant's knowledge of the defendant's prior incarceration, and correctly excluded self-defense evidence for firearms offenses.
• United States v. Martinez
  479 F.2d 824· 1st Cir.· 1973-05-08 ·cited 63×
  Joinder of defendants in the indictment was proper under Fed.R.Crim.P. 8(b) as the offenses constituted a series of transactions, and the denial of severance under Rule 14 was not an abuse of discretion as no prejudice was shown.
• Iroquois Indus., Inc. v. Syracuse China Corp.
  417 F.2d 963· 2d Cir.· 1969-11-03 ·cited 63×
  A civil action under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires the plaintiff to be a purchaser or seller of securities, adhering to the Birnbaum rule.
• Tora C. Brennan v. Midwestern United Life Ins. Co.
  417 F.2d 147· 7th Cir.· 1969-09-29 ·cited 63×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support a finding that the defendant had knowledge of or aided and abetted the fraud.
• Saunders v. United States
  316 F.2d 346· D.C. Cir.· 1963-01-31 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the trial judge erred by failing to conduct an inquiry into whether notes taken by a government attorney during a pre-trial interview constituted a "statement" under the Jencks Act, which should have been produced upon request.
• Mac T. Hall v. United States
  286 F.2d 676· 5th Cir.· 1960-12-23 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for willful misapplication of bank funds, as the defendant could be found to have known about and benefited from the bank officer's actions, even if he intended to repay the funds eventually.
• United States v. Harotunian
  920 F.2d 1040· 1st Cir.· 1990-12-05 ·cited 62×
  A sentence can only represent one departure (up or down) based on the net result of all calculations, and appellate rights are determined by the final imposed sentence.
• United States v. Campbell
  706 F.2d 1138· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-06 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the 266-day delay from indictment to trial did not violate the Speedy Trial Act because various pretrial motions and the joinder with co-defendants justified time exclusions.
• United States v. Terebecki
  692 F.2d 1345· 11th Cir.· 1982-12-06 ·cited 62×
  The trial court abused its discretion by excluding evidence relevant to the defendant's intent to defraud.
• United States v. Raper
  676 F.2d 841· D.C. Cir.· 1982-04-30 ·cited 62×
  The court affirmed the conviction of appellant Childs and Raper for unlawful possession of heroin with intent to distribute, finding sufficient evidence for constructive possession.