Pinkerton V. United States

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

• United States v. Augustin Alvarez
  755 F.2d 830· 11th Cir.· 1985-03-20 ·cited 179×
  BATF agents are protected under 18 U.S.C. § 1114, and knowledge of the victim's federal status is not an element of the assault crime under 18 U.S.C. § 111.
• United States v. Kaplan
  554 F.2d 958· 9th Cir.· 1977-05-26 ·cited 161×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy and substantive counts, except for mail fraud on Count 22, which was reversed. Severance motions were denied.
• United States v. Meester
  762 F.2d 867· 11th Cir.· 1985-05-20 ·cited 111×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a murder relevant to ongoing drug conspiracies and that the jury instructions were proper.
• United States v. Claret Echeverry
  698 F.2d 375· 9th Cir.· 1983-01-31 ·cited 107×
  The court held that the jury instruction regarding the duration of the conspiracy was prejudicially ambiguous, tainting the conspiracy conviction and potentially the substantive counts.
• NYE & Nissen v. United States
  168 F.2d 846· 9th Cir.· 1948-06-21 ·cited 107×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the evidence supported the convictions for conspiracy and false claims, and that alleged prosecutorial misconduct did not warrant reversal.
• United States v. Stirling
  571 F.2d 708· 2d Cir.· 1978-02-02 ·cited 82×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting the defendant's grand jury testimony into evidence.
• United States v. Garcia
  785 F.2d 214· 8th Cir.· 1986-02-25 ·cited 80×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on severance, cross-examination, admission of co-defendant testimony, suppression of evidence, or sufficiency of evidence for the conspiracy charge.
• United States v. Casperson
  773 F.2d 216· 8th Cir.· 1985-09-17 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the trial court erred by failing to give a requested good faith or theory of defense instruction, and that the evidence was insufficient to support Ruis' conviction.
• Park v. H. T. (Tommy) Huff
  506 F.2d 849· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-20 ·cited 58×
  The majority opinion misunderstands the Confrontation Clause by allowing hearsay statements from unavailable witnesses to be admitted against the defendant.
• United States v. Otero
  890 F.2d 366· 11th Cir.· 1989-12-11 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the enhancements for firearm possession and aggravating role were properly applied, and the sentencing judge did not err in her application of the Sentencing Guidelines.
• Carrado v. United States
  210 F.2d 712· D.C. Cir.· 1953-12-10 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in various rulings regarding the indictment, evidence, witness testimony, and jury instructions, affirming the convictions.
• United States v. Alicia Davis (85-1153)
  809 F.2d 1194· 6th Cir.· 1987-01-15 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the district court did not err in conducting an in camera hearing regarding peremptory challenges, as defendants' presence was not constitutionally required and their counsel had ample opportunity to present arguments. The court also affirmed the district cour
• United States v. Gonzalez
  933 F.2d 417· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-01 ·cited 48×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentence, holding that the indictment was not multiplicitous, severance was not required, the display of cocaine was proper, expert testimony was admissible, and there was sufficient evidence for the convictions.
• United States v. Lechuga
  888 F.2d 1472· 5th Cir.· 1989-11-14 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's conviction for conspiracy to distribute cocaine and that the admission of co-conspirator statements was proper.
• United States v. Wechsler
  392 F.2d 344· 4th Cir.· 1968-02-05 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the federal bribery statute is not limited by state law definitions of bribery and that the crime is not complete until the unlawful act is accomplished after using interstate commerce facilities.
• United States v. Miller
  508 F.2d 444· 7th Cir.· 1974-12-18 ·cited 39×
  The court held that the conspiracy and substantive Dyer Act counts were distinct offenses, and that the erroneous admission of other crimes evidence against Miller and Davis was harmless due to overwhelming evidence of their guilt. However, Jordan's conviction was reversed due to
• Gradsky v. United States
  376 F.2d 993· 5th Cir.· 1967-05-02 ·cited 38×
  The court held that convictions for substantive offenses committed by co-conspirators before a defendant joined or after they withdrew from the conspiracy are improper, except where the defendant is convicted only of offenses committed during their membership.
• United States v. Ayala
  887 F.2d 62· 5th Cir.· 1989-10-16 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendants' convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute, and for possession with intent to distribute, marihuana.
• United States v. Ann (LNU) Decker and Larry J. Vice
  543 F.2d 1102· 5th Cir.· 1976-12-10 ·cited 35×
  The court held that vicarious liability under Pinkerton v. United States is applicable to narcotics distribution conspiracies and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to admit a juvenile adjudication for impeachment purposes.
• United States v. Moises Benmuhar
  658 F.2d 14· 1st Cir.· 1981-09-08 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the appellants' convictions for conspiracy and fraud, and that the jury selection process and sentencing did not violate constitutional or statutory rights.
• United States v. Kellerman
  431 F.2d 319· 2d Cir.· 1970-07-24 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the defendants' conspiracy to distribute counterfeit credit cards and their substantive violations thereof constituted mail fraud, and that evidence admitted subject to connection was not reversible error.
• United States v. Blitz
  533 F.2d 1329· 2d Cir.· 1976-03-25 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the convictions of certain defendants as aiders and abettors of securities fraud should be reversed because there was insufficient evidence that they knew of the specific fraudulent transactions they were convicted of aiding and abetting.
• United States v. Gonzalez
  918 F.2d 1129· 3d Cir.· 1990-11-16 ·cited 25×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding that the jury verdicts and sentences were reasonable and supported by the evidence, and that the district court did not err in its rulings on plea agreements, evidence sufficiency, severance, sequestration, or sentencing.
• United States v. Cardenas
  917 F.2d 683· 2d Cir.· 1990-10-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the ten-year supervised release term was an illegal sentence because it exceeded the statutory maximum, and that the district court erred by not providing advance notice of its intent to depart upwardly from the sentencing guidelines.
• United States v. Maceo Thomas
  342 F.2d 132· 6th Cir.· 1965-02-12 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that defendants lacked standing to challenge the search of premises they did not own or possess. The court also rejected the double jeopardy claim and the argument that the indictment was invalid du
• Pegram v. United States
  361 F.2d 820· 8th Cir.· 1966-06-13 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the denial of the defendant's motion to vacate his sentence was proper because the charges were properly joined and consecutive sentences were permissible.
• United States v. Alvarez
  626 F.2d 208· 1st Cir.· 1980-07-28 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the appellant's convictions for conspiracy, aiding and abetting, and possession of cocaine, but that the special parole term was improperly imposed.
• United States v. Manning
  509 F.2d 1230· 9th Cir.· 1974-12-23 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to grant a new trial based on jury misconduct.
• United States v. Rengifo
  858 F.2d 800· 1st Cir.· 1988-10-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the warrantless arrests and seizures were justified by exigent circumstances and the plain view doctrine, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Howard "Ace" Underhill
  813 F.2d 105· 6th Cir.· 1987-03-06 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the exclusionary rule of the Federal Wiretap Act does not apply to suppress recordings made by participants in an illegal gambling business, even if the recording itself constitutes a criminal act, because Congress did not intend to allow perpetrators to benef
• United States v. Martinez
  958 F.2d 217· 8th Cir.· 1992-02-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's convictions for conspiracy to distribute cocaine, possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and using a firearm during a drug-trafficking offense.
• United States v. Reis
  788 F.2d 54· 1st Cir.· 1986-04-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction and sentences were valid, rejecting all his appellate arguments regarding double jeopardy, sentencing, witness testimony, prosecutorial remarks, jury composition, severance, and bail.
• United States v. Smith
  835 F.2d 1048· 3d Cir.· 1987-12-29 ·cited 8×
  Orders denying bail pending disposition of a federal habeas corpus petition are appealable under the collateral order doctrine, and the appellant did not demonstrate a strong showing of likelihood of success on the merits to overcome the presumption of correctness for the custody
• United States v. Brunk
  615 F.2d 210· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the second indictment's count 3 does not violate double jeopardy, as it charges a separate offense from the first indictment.
• United States v. Bonilla
  615 F.2d 1262· 9th Cir.· 1980-04-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellants' contentions of error regarding the production of a confidential informant, prosecutorial comments, admission of statements, admission of telephone records, and sufficiency of evidence were without merit.
• United States v. Scott Tisdale (90-3302)
  952 F.2d 934· 6th Cir.· 1992-01-02 ·cited 6×
  The court should remand the firearm enhancement aspect of the sentence because the district court failed to articulate specific factual grounds for finding that the defendant reasonably should have foreseen his coconspirator's possession of the weapon.
• United States v. Wilson
  535 F.2d 521· 9th Cir.· 1976-05-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, federal jurisdiction was established, and the sentence was not excessive due to concurrent sentencing.
• United States v. Ignazio Marchese
  438 F.2d 452· 2d Cir.· 1971-01-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the trial court's instructions and evidentiary rulings were proper.
• United States v. MacDOUGAL-Pena
  545 F.2d 833· 2d Cir.· 1976-12-01 ·cited 5×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions for interstate transportation of stolen securities and conspiracy, and that venue was proper in the Southern District of New York.
• United States v. Rayful Edmond, III
  924 F.2d 261· D.C. Cir.· 1991-01-22 ·cited 4×
  The dissenting judge believes the court should follow the D.C. Court of Appeals' interpretation of D.C. law regarding aider and abettor convictions, even if it differs from federal precedent.
• Cardarella v. United States
  351 F.2d 272· 8th Cir.· 1965-10-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that consecutive sentences for conspiracy and the substantive offense do not constitute double punishment.
• Pifer v. United States
  245 F.2d 704· 4th Cir.· 1957-06-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that conspiracy to escape and the substantive offense of escape are distinct crimes, and consecutive sentences for both do not constitute double punishment.
• The United States v. Johnson
  466 F.2d 1206· 8th Cir.· 1972-09-19 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, invalidity of sentence, and illegal arrest were without merit.
• United States v. Sealfon
  161 F.2d 481· 3d Cir.· 1947-05-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an acquittal on a conspiracy charge does not bar a subsequent prosecution for the substantive offense of aiding and abetting, even if based on the same transactions.