Federal Rule Of Evidence 801(D)(2)(E) (Co-Conspirator Statements)

146 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• United States v. Emerson Molt
  758 F.2d 1198· 7th Cir.· 1985-04-01 ·cited 34×
  The court held that applying the stricter bail pending appeal standard under the Bail Reform Act of 1984 to crimes committed before its enactment does not violate the Ex Post Facto Clause.
• United States v. Daly
  842 F.2d 1380· 2d Cir.· 1988-03-28 ·cited 33×
  The court held that surveillance tapes were admissible against a defendant as co-conspirator statements and that expert testimony regarding organized crime was admissible for background, affirming convictions.
• United States v. McDONALD
  935 F.2d 1212· 11th Cir.· 1991-07-17 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions for conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute were supported by sufficient evidence and that various procedural and sentencing issues raised on appeal lacked merit.
• United States v. Hernandez
  829 F.2d 988· 10th Cir.· 1987-09-22 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motions to sever, suppress wiretap evidence, disclose informants, admit post-arrest threat evidence, or in admitting co-conspirator statements.
• United States v. Hines
  717 F.2d 1481· 4th Cir.· 1983-09-09 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that their procedural and evidentiary challenges lacked merit.
• United States v. Metro. Enters., Inc.
  728 F.2d 444· 10th Cir.· 1984-02-24 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict for conspiracy to rig bids under the Sherman Act, and that the indictment sufficiently stated an offense.
• United States v. Rubiett Jenkins
  779 F.2d 606· 11th Cir.· 1986-01-10 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conspiracy convictions for appellants Quarterman, Prather, and McTeer, but reversed Jenkins' conviction due to insufficient evidence. The court also found no prejudicial variance between the indictment and the proof o
• World OF Sleep, Inc. v. La-Z-Boy Chair Co.
  756 F.2d 1467· 10th Cir.· 1985-03-04 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a vertical conspiracy to maintain resale prices is illegal per se, and that sufficient evidence existed to send the Sherman Act claim against La-Z-Boy to the jury. However, insufficient evidence existed to support the claim against Montgomery Ward and Mauldin.
• United States v. McGUIRE
  608 F.2d 1028· 5th Cir.· 1979-12-26 ·cited 28×
  The court held that McGuire's severance and hearsay objections were properly denied, and Rivera's conviction for conspiracy was supported by sufficient evidence, but his convictions for distribution and possession were not.
• United States v. Green
  600 F.2d 154· 8th Cir.· 1979-06-11 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the admission of co-conspirator statements, even if not made in furtherance of the conspiracy, was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence, and that other evidentiary and constitutional claims lacked merit.
• In re Fine Paper Antitrust Litig. (Ten cases) The State OF Alaska v. Boise Cascade Corp.
  685 F.2d 810· 3d Cir.· 1982-07-16 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its scheduling, transfer of venue, evidentiary rulings, or discovery sanctions, and therefore affirmed the jury's verdict in favor of the defendants.
• United States v. Dalton Green
  887 F.2d 25· 1st Cir.· 1989-10-13 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting firearms and coconspirator statements, nor was the evidence insufficient for conviction.
• United States v. Garver
  809 F.2d 1291· 7th Cir.· 1987-01-15 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting co-conspirator statements, evidence of fee payments, and denying severance motions, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions for conspiracy, mail fraud, and RICO violations.
• United States v. Pasquale Panza
  750 F.2d 1141· 2d Cir.· 1984-12-18 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding that the indictment was sufficient, severance was not required, the evidence supported guilty knowledge and intent, and evidentiary rulings were proper.
• United States v. Hansen
  583 F.2d 325· 7th Cir.· 1978-08-15 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying severance motions or restricting cross-examination, and that most convictions were supported by sufficient evidence. However, the court reversed and remanded the perjury convictions for Steven R. Hansen due to prejudicial
• United States v. Riyaid Swidan
  888 F.2d 1076· 6th Cir.· 1989-10-30 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions, finding that the district court properly admitted coconspirator statements and that the defendant's other claims lacked merit or were procedurally barred.
• United States v. Bernal
  884 F.2d 1518· 1st Cir.· 1989-09-14 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of both appellants, finding no merit in their challenges regarding sentencing, evidentiary rulings, or sufficiency of evidence.
• Earle v. Benoit
  850 F.2d 836· 1st Cir.· 1988-06-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding evidence of town officers' statements due to lack of proven conspiracy, but erred in directing a verdict on the civil rights conspiracy claim, though this error was harmless.
• United States v. David O'Malley & Robert Salerno
  796 F.2d 891· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-09 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the jury instructions were proper, evidence was sufficient, and co-conspirator statements were admissible, affirming the convictions.
• United States v. Eirin
  778 F.2d 722· 11th Cir.· 1985-12-19 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting Botero's post-arrest statements, coconspirator statements, or evidence of other money laundering schemes, and that the denial of severance motions and claims of judicial/prosecutorial misconduct were also without mer
• United States v. Remigio
  767 F.2d 730· 10th Cir.· 1985-07-17 ·cited 24×
  The court held that entry through an open door in the presence of a defendant does not violate the knock-and-announce statute (18 U.S.C. § 3109), and a prosecutor's single, objected-to comment on post-arrest silence can be harmless error given overwhelming evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Dunn
  758 F.2d 30· 1st Cir.· 1985-03-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of evidence concerning a second extortion attempt did not constructively amend the indictment and was admissible under the co-conspirator exception to hearsay, and did not violate the Confrontation Clause.
• United States v. Jennell
  749 F.2d 1302· 9th Cir.· 1984-12-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to warrant a jury instruction on the defense of duress, and the admission of certain documents constituted harmless error.
• United States v. Roth
  736 F.2d 1222· 8th Cir.· 1984-06-12 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of a coconspirator's testimony about his agreement with the government, even without a limiting instruction, was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence. It also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying severanc
• United States v. Richardo Torres
  685 F.2d 921· 5th Cir.· 1982-08-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of sample drug transactions and co-conspirator statements was proper, and that Reinosa's post-arrest statement was admissible.
• United States v. Vasquez
  953 F.2d 176· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-23 ·cited 22×
  The court held that exigent circumstances justified the warrantless entry into the residence and that there was sufficient evidence to support the defendants' convictions for conspiracy and aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute marijuana.
• United States v. Schepp
  746 F.2d 406· 8th Cir.· 1984-10-11 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of flight, allowing leading questions, limiting cross-examination, admitting coconspirator statements, or in its handling of the government's closing remarks.
• United States v. Ochoa
  564 F.2d 1155· 5th Cir.· 1977-12-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the admission of coconspirator statements was proper and the prosecutor's closing remarks did not constitute plain error, affirming the convictions.
• United States v. Brooks
  957 F.2d 1138· 4th Cir.· 1992-02-28 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy to distribute cocaine, but vacated one defendant's sentence for obstruction of justice and remanded for resentencing.
• United States v. Simmons
  923 F.2d 934· 2d Cir.· 1991-01-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the admission of unredacted grand jury testimony during deliberations, while potentially a Sixth Amendment violation, was harmless error because the testimony was cumulative and the defendant's credibility was extensively attacked. The court also affirmed the
• United States v. Kusek
  844 F.2d 942· 2d Cir.· 1988-04-06 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the admission of wiretap tapes despite a delay in sealing, the exclusion of handwriting exemplars, the establishment of venue, the admission of a spontaneous oral statement, expert testimony on drug jargon, the use of a suppressed t
• United States v. GEE
  695 F.2d 1165· 9th Cir.· 1983-01-06 ·cited 19×
  The court held that while the government committed a Rule 16 violation by failing to produce a transcript, the defendant suffered no prejudice.
• United States v. Jackson
  757 F.2d 1486· 4th Cir.· 1985-03-21 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a defendant cannot demand pre-trial discovery of a co-conspirator's statement when the government does not intend to call the co-conspirator as a witness.
• United States v. Spoone
  741 F.2d 680· 4th Cir.· 1984-08-08 ·cited 18×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy and substantive offenses for most defendants, but reversed substantive convictions for Michael Spoone due to insufficient evidence. The court also affirmed Rusty Spoone's conspiracy conviction despite his age at the time of some acts.
• United States v. Correa-Arroyave
  721 F.2d 792· 11th Cir.· 1983-12-23 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the admission of co-conspirator statements was proper, the prosecutor's comments were not misconduct, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Norton
  846 F.2d 521· 8th Cir.· 1988-05-16 ·cited 16×
• United States v. Scartz
  838 F.2d 876· 6th Cir.· 1988-02-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings or in its application of the correct legal standard for determining conspiracy membership.
• United States v. Hollins
  811 F.2d 384· 7th Cir.· 1987-02-10 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the defendant's convictions, holding that the district court properly denied motions to suppress evidence and dismiss the indictment, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict.
• United States v. Dekle
  768 F.2d 1257· 11th Cir.· 1985-08-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that there was no fatal variance between the indictment and evidence, joinder of defendants was proper, and various evidentiary rulings were either harmless error or not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. Chiavola
  744 F.2d 1271· 7th Cir.· 1984-09-21 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the admission of evidence obtained from a telephone conversation, even if obtained through alleged police misconduct against a co-conspirator, was permissible because the defendant incriminated himself voluntarily and his trial was not fundamentally unfair. Th
• United States v. Homick
  964 F.2d 899· 9th Cir.· 1992-05-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the wiretap evidence was admissible, the district court did not err in evidentiary rulings, the evidence was sufficient for conviction, and the jury instructions were adequate.
• United States v. Harvey
  959 F.2d 1371· 7th Cir.· 1992-03-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of other crimes for the purpose of showing intent, in excluding certain defense evidence, or in limiting cross-examination, and that the defendant waived several other claims.
• United States v. Robinson
  956 F.2d 1388· 7th Cir.· 1992-02-27 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of a single conspiracy and that the district court did not err in admitting co-conspirator statements, jury instructions, tape recordings, transcripts, or evidence of prior marijuana conspiracy and imprisonment.
• United States v. Skinner
  946 F.2d 176· 2d Cir.· 1991-09-30 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed convictions for drug and money laundering offenses but remanded for reconsideration of a downward departure from the sentences imposed under the Sentencing Guidelines.
• United States v. Brown
  943 F.2d 1246· 10th Cir.· 1991-09-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that there was sufficient circumstantial evidence for a jury to find the appellant knowingly participated in the conspiracy and committed bankruptcy and mail fraud, but reversed and remanded for a new trial due to issues with co-conspirator statement admissibility.
• United States v. Johnson
  927 F.2d 999· 7th Cir.· 1991-03-20 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while the district court erroneously admitted a co-conspirator's statement, the error was harmless because other substantial evidence proved the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Garbett
  867 F.2d 1132· 8th Cir.· 1989-02-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court properly admitted co-conspirator statements and evidence of other crimes, but erred in admitting evidence of a prior conviction, though this was harmless error. The court also found plain error regarding defense counsel's statement and reman
• United States v. Yaffa Levy
  865 F.2d 551· 3d Cir.· 1989-01-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that there was sufficient independent evidence to admit co-conspirator statements under the Ammar standard and that the use of false passports and identities was admissible. However, sentences for two defendants were vacated due to potential sentencing misunderstan
• United States v. Silverman
  771 F.2d 1193· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-16 ·cited 14×
  The court held that statements implicating the defendant as a co-conspirator were properly admitted under FRE 801(d)(2)(E) and that a flight jury instruction was also proper.
• United States v. Miller
  799 F.2d 985· 5th Cir.· 1986-09-12 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions based on outrageous government conduct and in admitting co-conspirator statements, and that the defendant did not demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel.