Joinder Of Defendants

245 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Varelli
  407 F.2d 735· 7th Cir.· 1969-02-11 ·cited 322×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove a single overall conspiracy, and the defendants were prejudiced by being tried together for multiple conspiracies without proper jury instructions. Therefore, the convictions are voided.
• Tillman v. United States
  406 F.2d 930· 5th Cir.· 1969-01-09 ·cited 299×
  The court held that the trial court's investigation into alleged juror misconduct was adequate, despite a minor date discrepancy in the judge's questioning.
• United States v. Michel
  588 F.2d 986· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-01 ·cited 209×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for conspiracy to import marijuana and importation of marijuana, and that the stop and search of the U-Haul truck were legal.
• United States v. Hoffa
  349 F.2d 20· 6th Cir.· 1965-07-29 ·cited 203×
  The court held that the "suggester system" for jury selection is not per se invalid and that the defendants failed to make a sufficient showing of discrimination to warrant a full investigation into the grand jury's composition. The court also held that the informant's testimony
• United States v. Kahn
  381 F.2d 824· 7th Cir.· 1967-06-29 ·cited 185×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the credibility and lying witness instructions were not erroneous, the denial of a mistrial upon a co-defendant's guilty plea was not an abuse of discretion, and the denial of severance was proper.
• United States v. Braasch
  505 F.2d 139· 7th Cir.· 1974-10-23 ·cited 178×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy to commit extortion and perjury, and that various procedural and evidentiary issues raised by the appellants were without merit.
• United States v. Hedman
  630 F.2d 1184· 7th Cir.· 1980-08-29 ·cited 172×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for conspiracy to commit extortion, extortion under color of official right, and filing fraudulent tax returns, and that the jury instructions were proper.
• United States v. Russell
  703 F.2d 1243· 11th Cir.· 1983-04-25 ·cited 164×
  The court held that the joinder of defendants was permissible, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance, the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, and the trial court properly admitted co-conspirator statements.
• United States v. Kennedy
  564 F.2d 1329· 9th Cir.· 1977-11-28 ·cited 155×
  The court held that joinder of defendants was proper, denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion, and the trial court did not err in refusing to dismiss the indictment for failure to present exculpatory evidence to the grand jury or in rejecting a requested jury instructi
• United States v. Kenny
  645 F.2d 1323· 9th Cir.· 1981-01-23 ·cited 144×
  The court held that the evidence presented was sufficient to support a finding of a single conspiracy, and that the trial court did not err in its rulings on the order of proof, admission of evidence, or jury instructions.
• United States v. Winter
  663 F.2d 1120· 1st Cir.· 1981-10-30 ·cited 142×
  The court held that the Government's use of a non-statutory immunity agreement with a key witness was permissible and did not violate defendants' rights, and that the jury's decision to credit the witness's testimony was within their prerogative.
• United States v. Kenny
  462 F.2d 1205· 3d Cir.· 1972-05-22 ·cited 139×
  The court held that the indictment was not vague, duplicitous, or fatally varied, and that the joinder of offenses and defendants was proper, affirming the convictions.
• United States v. Cravero
  545 F.2d 406· 5th Cir.· 1976-08-06 ·cited 136×
  Entry into a third party's home to execute an arrest warrant is permissible without a search warrant if officers reasonably believe the suspect is present.
• United States v. Hutul
  416 F.2d 607· 7th Cir.· 1969-09-09 ·cited 127×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for mail fraud and conspiracy, except for one count against Sacks, and that the evidence did not prove multiple conspiracies as argued by the defendants.
• In & for New Castle Cnty.
  1997 WL 27094· Del. Super. Ct.· 2014-04-30 ·cited 125×
  The court denied the defendant's motion for postconviction relief, finding that most of his claims were procedurally barred under Superior Court Criminal Rule 61. The court applied the Strickland v. Washington standard to the defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claims,
• United States v. Wilson
  657 F.2d 755· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-30 ·cited 120×
  The court held that while the evidence was sufficient to convict appellants on the conspiracy charge, it was insufficient for the possession and distribution charges against Wilson, and the possession charge against Hendrix. Joinder and severance issues were found to be without m
• United States v. Dante Angelo Grassi and Jack Louis Gail
  616 F.2d 1295· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-14 ·cited 120×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Grassi's conviction for conspiracy under count 1, but sufficient for his conviction under count 2. The court also found sufficient evidence for Gail's conspiracy conviction and rejected his entrapment defense.
• United States v. Eubanks
  591 F.2d 513· 9th Cir.· 1979-02-02 ·cited 118×
  The court, in a concurring opinion, expresses concerns that the prosecution's broad conspiracy charge and joinder of multiple defendants may have abused joinder powers and created undue prejudice, potentially outweighing judicial economy benefits.
• United States v. Butler
  494 F.2d 1246· 10th Cir.· 1974-04-04 ·cited 118×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions of appellants Butler, Gregg, and Slomkowski for conspiracy and substantive offenses, and reversed their convictions. The court reversed Reinke's convictions based on a procedural error regarding the sing
• United States v. Franks
  511 F.2d 25· 6th Cir.· 1975-02-12 ·cited 116×
  The court held that the joinder of defendants and offenses was proper, and that the admission of evidence, including tape recordings and voiceprint analysis, did not constitute reversible error. The court also found no violation of speedy trial rights or grounds for recusal.
• United States v. Bledsoe
  674 F.2d 647· 8th Cir.· 1982-03-12 ·cited 115×
  The court held that the evidence presented was sufficient to prove the existence of a RICO enterprise and that joinder of defendants was proper, or any misjoinder constituted harmless error.
• United States v. Bernstein
  533 F.2d 775· 2d Cir.· 1976-03-04 ·cited 109×
  The court held that the district court committed prejudicial error by allowing the jury to determine as a question of fact whether defendants were held to an undefined standard of exercising 'proper credit judgment'.
• United States v. Irie E. Leonard
  494 F.2d 955· D.C. Cir.· 1974-01-31 ·cited 109×
  The court held that the district court committed reversible error by refusing to instruct the jury to scrutinize the testimony of witnesses granted immunity and by limiting cross-examination regarding pending felony charges against a witness. It also held that the failure to prov
• United States v. McDONALD
  576 F.2d 1350· 9th Cir.· 1978-05-04 ·cited 108×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to sustain McDonald's convictions for mail fraud and interstate transportation of fraudulently obtained property, reversing his conviction. The convictions of the other appellants were affirmed.
• United States v. Eliot H. Weisman and Salvatore J. Cannatella
  624 F.2d 1118· 2d Cir.· 1980-04-04 ·cited 107×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the district court properly instructed the jury on RICO's 'pattern of racketeering activity' and that intervening circumstances dissipated the taint of an illegal arrest, rendering subsequent statements admissible.
• United States v. Levine
  546 F.2d 658· 5th Cir.· 1977-02-07 ·cited 105×
  The court held that the indictment improperly joined separate and distinct conspiracies in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 8(b), requiring reversal of the convictions and remand for a new trial.
• United States v. Harrelson
  754 F.2d 1153· 5th Cir.· 1985-02-15 ·cited 102×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions for change of venue, recusal, or in admitting testimony, as the jury selection process and judicial conduct were proper.
• United States v. Jacki Eugene Leach
  429 F.2d 956· 8th Cir.· 1970-07-23 ·cited 101×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions for assaulting federal officers were supported by sufficient evidence and that various trial errors alleged were either harmless or properly handled by the trial court.
• United States v. Bohr
  581 F.2d 1294· 8th Cir.· 1978-07-26 ·cited 99×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of prior crimes, the introduction of a mug shot, the denial of severance, prosecutorial remarks, juror misconduct, and the exclusion of polygraph evidence did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Ford
  632 F.2d 1354· 9th Cir.· 1980-09-26 ·cited 97×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to affirm convictions for embezzlement under 18 U.S.C. § 664 related to a deferred compensation plan and a pension credit scheme, but reversed convictions for two trustees due to insufficient evidence of criminal intent. Conspirac
• United States v. Wayman
  510 F.2d 1020· 5th Cir.· 1975-04-03 ·cited 97×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions for new trial based on juror bias, severance, mistrial, dismissal, acquittal, or in refusing certain jury charges, and that no double jeopardy violation occurred.
• United States v. Hewes
  729 F.2d 1302· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-16 ·cited 96×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove a RICO enterprise and that coconspirator hearsay statements were admissible. However, it reversed convictions for two counts of mail fraud against Caldwell and Langford.
• King v. United States
  355 F.2d 700· 1st Cir.· 1966-01-18 ·cited 96×
  The court held that the joinder of offenses and defendants was improper under Rule 8(b) because the alleged offenses did not constitute a "series of acts or transactions" in which the defendant King participated.
• United States v. Wilson
  894 F.2d 1245· 11th Cir.· 1990-02-20 ·cited 93×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing a juror for just cause and proceeding with an eleven-person verdict, and that probable cause and exigent circumstances justified a warrantless vehicle search. However, the district court erred in co
• United States v. Crockett
  514 F.2d 64· 5th Cir.· 1975-06-05 ·cited 93×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the trial court did not err in its rulings on evidence, jury instructions, or severance motions.
• United States v. Valenzuela
  596 F.2d 824· 9th Cir.· 1979-03-23 ·cited 92×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy and possession against Manuel Valenzuela, Corley, and Alonso Lizarraga, but reversed Bernardina Lizarraga's convictions due to insufficient evidence.
• Monroe v. United States
  234 F.2d 49· D.C. Cir.· 1956-04-30 ·cited 92×
  The court held that a variance between the conspiracy charge and the proof did not affect the substantial rights of the accused, recorded conversations were admissible, and joint trials of conspiracy and substantive bribery charges were not prejudicial.
• United States v. Southard
  700 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1983-01-28 ·cited 90×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying a Franks hearing, admitting evidence of gambling activities, or finding the evidence sufficient for conviction, and that the ex parte, in camera interview was harmless error.
• United States v. Welch
  656 F.2d 1039· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-21 ·cited 89×
  The court held that the RICO substantive count provided sufficient nexus to join two otherwise separate conspiracies under Fed.R.Crim.P. 8(b), and affirmed convictions for most defendants and charges, but reversed Satterwhite's RICO conviction due to insufficient evidence.
• James v. United States
  416 F.2d 467· 5th Cir.· 1969-09-17 ·cited 89×
  The court held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction and that various alleged trial errors, including issues with jury selection, indictment sufficiency, search warrants, joinder, co-defendant statements, jury instructions, grand jury testimony disclosure, de
• United States v. Bridwell
  583 F.2d 1135· 10th Cir.· 1978-09-11 ·cited 88×
  The court held that while the prosecutor's comment on a defendant's refusal to waive Miranda rights was an error, it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also found that other alleged errors, including issues with search warrants, evidence admissibility, prosecutor a
• Smith F. Brandom, Jr. v. United States
  431 F.2d 1391· 7th Cir.· 1970-06-30 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying severance motions, admitting certain evidence, or in its jury instructions, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions.
• United States v. Butera
  677 F.2d 1376· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-10 ·cited 86×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the admission of evidence, witness sequestration, judicial remarks, prosecutorial comments, or jury selection. The court also affirmed the joinder and severance rulings for DeNoma, and applied the concurrent sente
• United States v. Vaccaro
  816 F.2d 443· 9th Cir.· 1987-04-29 ·cited 85×
  The court held that joinder of defendants was proper, severance was not required, and evidence of other crimes was admissible under Rule 404(b). Aiding and abetting violations of the Travel Act do not require proof of knowledge of interstate facility use.
• United States v. Zicree
  605 F.2d 1381· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-08 ·cited 85×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the mail fraud convictions, joinder of defendants was proper, and the trial judge did not err in denying motions for a new trial, giving an Allen charge, or qualifying an expert witness.
• United States v. Cruz
  478 F.2d 408· 5th Cir.· 1973-05-04 ·cited 85×
  The court held that indictments based on hearsay are valid, destroyed notes do not violate the Jencks Act if not substantially verbatim, and variance or joinder issues do not require reversal absent prejudice, especially in a bench trial.
• United States v. Esau Jackson
  696 F.2d 578· 8th Cir.· 1982-12-28 ·cited 84×
  The court held that the government failed to prove a single conspiracy as alleged, leading to a variance error that prejudiced the defendants' right to a fair trial. However, Jackson's convictions on substantive mail fraud counts were affirmed due to sufficient independent eviden
• United States v. Granello
  365 F.2d 990· 2d Cir.· 1966-08-03 ·cited 83×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the denial of a severance motion was not prejudicial and that defendants lacked standing to suppress evidence seized from a third party.
• United States v. Eagleston
  417 F.2d 11· 10th Cir.· 1969-10-17 ·cited 82×
  The court held that Faubian was misjoined as a defendant under Fed.R.Crim.P. 8(b) and his conviction must be reversed, while Eagleston's convictions were affirmed.
• Rhozier T. Brown, Jr. v. United States
  375 F.2d 310· D.C. Cir.· 1966-12-30 ·cited 82×
  The court held that the accomplice's testimony was admissible because the connection between the illegal police conduct and the testimony was sufficiently attenuated.