Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute

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

• United States v. Polite
  489 F.2d 679· 5th Cir.· 1974-02-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the trial court did not err in admitting certain testimony or in its jury instructions.
• United States v. Bumatay
  480 F.2d 1012· 9th Cir.· 1973-06-25 ·cited 12×
  The denial of a motion for severance is not an abuse of discretion when the defendant fails to show that a codefendant would testify at a severed trial.
• United States v. Sher Malik Bahadar
  954 F.2d 821· 2d Cir.· 1992-01-22 ·cited 11×
  The court held that a witness invoking the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is unavailable for hearsay exceptions, and that exculpatory statements against penal interest require corroborating circumstances to ensure trustworthiness.
• United States v. Ramirez
  880 F.2d 236· 9th Cir.· 1989-07-24 ·cited 11×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the defendant's conviction for drug offenses.
• United States v. Irej Alex Malekzadeh
  855 F.2d 1492· 11th Cir.· 1988-09-28 ·cited 11×
  The court held that wiretaps were lawful, the exclusionary rule's good faith exception applied, and the retrial did not violate double jeopardy. Sentences were affirmed.
• United States v. Hernandez
  580 F.2d 188· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-18 ·cited 11×
• United States v. Rodriguez
  75 F.4th 1231· 11th Cir.· 2023-08-01 ·cited 10×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's application of the premises enhancement but vacated and remanded for resentencing on the supervised release conditions that were not orally pronounced.
• United States v. Maier
  975 F.2d 944· 2d Cir.· 1992-09-23 ·cited 10×
  A defendant's rehabilitative efforts can warrant a downward departure from the Sentencing Guidelines in an appropriate case, and the district court's findings adequately supported such a departure here.
• United States v. McGLORY
  968 F.2d 309· 3d Cir.· 1992-06-19 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentence, but the concurring opinion questions the sufficiency of coded conversations as evidence and analyzes the ambiguity in sentencing under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A).
• United States v. Ruggiero
  928 F.2d 1289· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in dismissing a juror and instructing the remaining jury to begin deliberations anew, as the juror's fear, stemming from an encounter outside his home, rendered him unable to provide a fair and impartial verdict.
• United States v. Ahmad Afjehei
  869 F.2d 670· 2d Cir.· 1989-03-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of the defendant's prior international trips was improperly admitted under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) because it was not sufficiently similar to the charged offense to prove knowledge and was unduly prejudicial.
• United States v. Washington
  852 F.2d 803· 4th Cir.· 1988-08-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the search warrant was validly issued and executed, and the evidence obtained was admissible.
• United States v. Shah Mohammed Nikzad
  739 F.2d 1431· 9th Cir.· 1984-08-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court must determine whether the defendant freely consented to the search of his luggage, as this issue was not resolved below.
• United States v. Gonzalez
  715 F.2d 1411· 9th Cir.· 1983-09-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to elect between counts, nor in using the language of conspiracy in jury instructions.
• United States v. Russell
  655 F.2d 1261· D.C. Cir.· 1981-05-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the warrantless search of a paper grocery bag seized from a car was unlawful, but the search of a paper bag containing a gun was lawful because its contents were inferable from its outward appearance. The court affirmed convictions related to the gun but rever
• United States v. Wise
  603 F.2d 1101· 4th Cir.· 1979-07-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a defendant cannot assert a violation of a witness's Fifth Amendment privilege, and that considering a defendant's perjury at a co-defendant's trial during sentencing for the original offense does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• United States v. Obie Goodlow, Jr.
  597 F.2d 159· 9th Cir.· 1979-04-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendants' challenges to the jury array on statutory and constitutional grounds were without merit, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Madonna
  582 F.2d 704· 2d Cir.· 1978-09-01 ·cited 10×
  Consecutive sentences for conspiracy and substantive narcotics offenses are permissible as they are distinct crimes.
• United States v. Aurelio Avila-MacIas and Ernesto Laranaga
  577 F.2d 1384· 9th Cir.· 1978-07-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion regarding a juror's passing by a crime scene, the admission of co-conspirator statements, the exclusion of a surrebuttal witness, the informant's fee arrangement, or the order of jury instructions.
• United States v. Gill
  555 F.2d 597· 6th Cir.· 1977-05-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the appellant's suitcase was incident to a lawful arrest, as the officers had probable cause based on independent investigation corroborating an informant's tip.
• United States v. Ramsey
  538 F.2d 415· D.C. Cir.· 1976-06-10 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge believes border searches of international mail should not require a warrant, similar to other border searches.
• United States v. Wyadell Edmonds
  535 F.2d 714· 2d Cir.· 1976-05-07 ·cited 10×
• United States v. Ramirez
  524 F.2d 283· 10th Cir.· 1975-10-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the delay in bringing the defendant to trial did not violate his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial because the defendant suffered no prejudice.
• United States v. Hilton Jerry Kelton
  518 F.2d 531· 8th Cir.· 1975-07-03 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the petition for post-conviction relief, finding no clear error in the lower court's findings.
• United States v. Wade
  502 F.2d 144· 6th Cir.· 1974-08-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the case must be remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine if the defense counsel was misled by a court law clerk regarding jury instructions on lesser included offenses.
• United States v. Marquette Pierce
  498 F.2d 712· D.C. Cir.· 1974-05-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying a motion to dismiss for excessive delay or in refusing to give a purchasing agent instruction.
• United States v. Jones
  492 F.2d 239· 3d Cir.· 1974-02-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the accumulation of trial incidents, particularly the government's failure to make reasonable efforts to produce a crucial informant witness, significantly hampered the defense and denied the defendant a fair trial.
• United States v. Bagsby
  489 F.2d 725· 9th Cir.· 1973-12-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in restricting cross-examination regarding a polygraph examination and state parole status, as appellants were afforded sufficient opportunity to explore witness motives.
• United States v. Martinez
  488 F.2d 1088· 9th Cir.· 1973-11-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's arguments regarding entrapment, ineffective assistance of counsel, and a jury instruction were without merit or moot.
• United States v. Harding
  104 F.4th 1291· 11th Cir.· 2024-06-20 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of drug trafficking found years after the charged conspiracy as intrinsic evidence, and that the failure to provide a limiting instruction for evidence admitted under Rule 404(b) was also an abuse
• United States v. Reiter
  897 F.2d 639· 2d Cir.· 1990-02-26 ·cited 9×
  The court held that a defendant tried in absentia on a superseding indictment must be arraigned on that indictment if it is substantially different from the one previously arraigned upon, to ensure knowing waiver of the right to presence. The court also held that while counsel's
• United States v. Fafowora
  865 F.2d 360· D.C. Cir.· 1989-01-13 ·cited 9×
  The court affirmed the denial of motions to suppress evidence, motions for severance, and motions for a new trial, but certified a Sixth Amendment question regarding the release of seized funds to the Supreme Court.
• United States v. Fernandez-Guzman
  577 F.2d 1093· 7th Cir.· 1978-05-23 ·cited 9×
  A deficient post-arrest complaint under Rule 5(a) does not retroactively invalidate a warrantless arrest if probable cause existed at the time of arrest, and the district court may consider evidence outside the complaint on a motion to suppress.
• United States v. Oluremi Adebayo and Christopher A. Davis
  985 F.2d 1333· 7th Cir.· 1993-02-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress evidence obtained from Davis, finding the encounter was consensual and any subsequent detention was a justified investigatory stop, and that the sentence enhancement for obstruction of justice wa
• United States v. Colon
  961 F.2d 41· 2d Cir.· 1992-04-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court's calculation of the base offense level was proper and that post-sentence guideline amendments are to be pursued in the district court, not applied by the appellate court on direct review.
• United States v. Babatunde Yakubu
  936 F.2d 936· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the detention of the defendant at the border was justified by reasonable suspicion that he was smuggling contraband internally, and thus the denial of his motion to suppress evidence was proper.
• United States v. Arigbodi
  924 F.2d 462· 2d Cir.· 1991-01-25 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the sentence, holding that even if the district court erred in calculating the criminal history score by including uncounseled convictions, the alleged errors did not rise to the level of plain error because they did not affect the defendant's substantial right
• United States v. Serpoosh
  919 F.2d 835· 2d Cir.· 1990-11-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the denial of the severance motion was error because the mutually antagonistic defenses presented by the co-defendants created substantial prejudice, denying them a constitutionally fair trial.
• United States v. Conrado Jesus Gomez
  900 F.2d 43· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the tape recording of a conversation between the defendant and an informant may have been erroneously admitted because the record lacked evidence of consent to the interception, and this error was not harmless.
• United States v. Corky Nunez
  877 F.2d 1470· 10th Cir.· 1989-06-20 ·cited 8×
• United States v. Hernandez-Beltran
  867 F.2d 224· 5th Cir.· 1989-02-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for possession with intent to distribute 16 ounces and 1 gram of heroin, but insufficient for the 1-ounce conviction. The court also affirmed the mandatory minimum sentence imposed.
• United States v. Hernandez
  862 F.2d 17· 2d Cir.· 1988-11-21 ·cited 8×
  The removal of a sole holdout juror for acquittal on the fourth day of deliberations, particularly when the grounds for removal are unclear and the judge's remarks may have prejudiced the remaining jurors, constitutes reversible error.
• United States v. Kelley
  849 F.2d 999· 6th Cir.· 1988-06-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence supported a finding of a single conspiracy and that the admission of evidence concerning other deals was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Cervantes-Gaitan
  792 F.2d 770· 9th Cir.· 1986-05-09 ·cited 8×
  The court should remand for findings of fact and conclusions of law because the district court denied a suppression motion without adequate findings, making appellate review impossible.
• United States v. Bedros Kalaydjian
  784 F.2d 53· 2d Cir.· 1986-01-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that cross-examination of government witnesses regarding their reasons for choosing to affirm rather than swear on the Koran was properly precluded by Federal Rule of Evidence 610, as such inquiry would delve into religious beliefs and potentially prejudice the jur
• United States v. Loggins
  777 F.2d 336· 6th Cir.· 1985-11-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the affidavit provided a substantial basis for the magistrate to find probable cause to search the defendant's residence.
• United States v. Ayala
  769 F.2d 98· 2d Cir.· 1985-08-01 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed Gonzalez's conviction for engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise, finding sufficient evidence of substantial income, but upheld the setting aside of Ayala's conviction due to insufficient proof of substantial income.
• United States v. Bolanle Lawal
  736 F.2d 5· 2d Cir.· 1984-04-26 ·cited 8×
  The trial court's exclusion of defendant's statements regarding his intent to cooperate and anger was error, but harmless, because the jury was already aware of significant cooperation and other strong evidence indicated the defendant's knowledge of the heroin.
• United States v. Lorin Hugh Smith
  601 F.2d 972· 8th Cir.· 1979-07-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support the conviction on count III.
• United States v. Black
  595 F.2d 1116· 5th Cir.· 1979-05-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court's failure to conduct a preliminary hearing before admitting extrinsic offense evidence was not reversible error, as the appellate court could determine admissibility.