918 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 108 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
Willie Jones appealed his convictions for trafficking in cocaine, possession of marijuana with intent to sell, and possession of drug paraphernalia, arguing that the trial court's comments shifted the burden of proof and prejudiced his defense. The court affirmed Jones' convictio
-
A pretrial release condition requiring a defendant to demonstrate that bond funds are not derived from illegal activity is authorized by Florida law under § 903.046(2)(f) and does not constitute unconstitutional pretrial detention when imposed as a reasonable condition of release
-
The court held that the trial court erred by failing to conduct a proper Richardson hearing to inquire about the circumstances and prejudice of a discovery violation.
-
Gallardo appealed the denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained during a traffic stop, arguing the stop was unlawful. The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that Deputy Tucker had reasonable suspicion to stop Gallardo's vehicle based on her visual o
-
Ragin appeals his conviction for possession of cannabis with intent to sell, challenging the trial court's exclusion of evidence regarding a civil forfeiture settlement in which police returned half of seized currency to him. The Fourth District DCA reversed, holding that evidenc
-
-
The court held that where evidence is insufficient to prove an element of a charged offense (proximity to a park), but sufficient to prove a lesser included offense (possession with intent to sell), the appellate court must direct the trial court to enter judgment for the lesser
-
-
-
-
617 F. Supp. 2d 1240·
S.D. Fla.·
2008-10-24
The court affirmed the magistrate judge's report, denying the motion to suppress physical evidence and granting it in part for statements made in response to questioning about injuries, while denying suppression for other statements.
-
The court held that a discovery violation claim was without merit, but a double jeopardy claim regarding two cannabis convictions was valid.
-
Florida appellate court affirmed drug trafficking convictions but reversed the conviction for simple possession of cannabis as duplicative of the possession-with-intent-to-sell conviction, violating double jeopardy.
-
Joseph Thompson appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence from a drug search warrant and challenged his dual convictions for possession of cannabis in excess of twenty grams and possession of cannabis with intent to sell as violating double jeopardy pro
-
-
The court held that the trial court erred by failing to conduct a Richardson hearing to address the state's discovery violation regarding a prior drug sale, which prejudiced the defendant and required a new trial.
-
The court held that a police officer's generalized safety concerns arising from having a suspect accompany him to his vehicle to fill out a trespass warning do not meet the threshold for a lawful pat-down search for weapons.
-
The appellate court reviewed a trial court's suppression of evidence, specifically cannabis found in a vehicle, after the defendant fled from deputies who observed what they believed to be a drug transaction.
-
Juvenile charged with second-degree felony drug possession near school qualifies for release from detention because he lacks prior criminal record and does not meet statutory criteria for pre-adjudication detention under Florida law.
-
-
-
997 F.2d 1302·
9th Cir.·
1993-07-12
The erroneous admission of prior arrest and conviction evidence was not harmless and prejudiced the defendant, requiring reversal.
-
999 F.2d 1355·
9th Cir.·
1993-07-07
The court held that the admission of a codefendant's redacted confession, substituting a neutral term for the defendant's name, does not violate the Confrontation Clause if it is not powerfully incriminating on its face. The court also held that drug ledgers are admissible as cir
-
998 F.2d 791·
10th Cir.·
1993-07-06
The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, holding that the speedy trial rights were not violated, evidence was properly admitted despite jurisdictional and warrant challenges, and sentencing calculations were correct.
-
997 F.2d 189·
6th Cir.·
1993-06-25
A prior Michigan conviction for a 'two-year misdemeanor' constitutes a felony for the purpose of federal drug sentencing enhancement under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B).
-
995 F.2d 865·
8th Cir.·
1993-06-16
The court held that the admission of a redacted co-defendant confession did not violate the Confrontation Clause, and a prior guilty plea to a substantive offense did not bar a subsequent conspiracy conviction.
-
995 F.2d 808·
8th Cir.·
1993-06-03
The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the finding of 150 pounds of marijuana for offense level calculation for Valenzuela and Garrido, requiring resentencing. However, the court affirmed the denial of Carlos's pretrial motions and Ismael's sentencing enhanc
-
993 F.2d 1136·
4th Cir.·
1993-05-24
The evidence presented was sufficient to support the district court's finding of guilt for intending to distribute marijuana.
-
991 F.2d 1519·
10th Cir.·
1993-05-05
The court held that while the district court erred in failing to ensure the defendant had an opportunity to review and discuss the presentence report, remand for resentencing was not required because the defendant suffered no prejudice from the violation.
-
990 F.2d 586·
10th Cir.·
1993-04-16
The court affirmed the conviction for failure to appear but vacated the drug convictions due to improper trial in absentia.
-
985 F.2d 491·
10th Cir.·
1993-04-15
The court denied the petition for rehearing because it attempted to introduce new facts and reargue points already considered, failing to meet the standards for such petitions.
-
989 F.2d 1061·
9th Cir.·
1993-03-22
The court held that the search warrants were valid, the admission of certain hearsay statements was either proper or harmless error, other crimes evidence was admissible, severance was not required, prosecutorial misconduct did not warrant reversal, and the Sentencing Guidelines
-
987 F.2d 1493·
10th Cir.·
1993-03-03
The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant of drug and firearm offenses, and that the prosecution met the statutory requirements for plant quantity and firearm use.
-
983 F.2d 625·
5th Cir.·
1993-02-02
The court held that a district court's misstatement regarding the term of supervised release constitutes harmless error if it does not materially influence the defendant's decision to plead guilty. The court also modified the sentence to conform to statutory requirements for supe
-
981 F.2d 765·
5th Cir.·
1993-01-12
The court held that while allowing transcripts with extraneous interpretations was an abuse of discretion, it constituted harmless error. It also held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction for Rena Jr.
-
The court reversed and remanded because the defendant's seven-year sentence for cannabis possession with intent to sell exceeded the statutory maximum of five years, and the judgment incorrectly classified cocaine possession with intent to sell as a first-degree rather than secon
-
976 F.2d 930·
5th Cir.·
1992-10-23
The court held that the evidence seized was admissible under the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule, affirming the conviction.
-
972 F.2d 284·
9th Cir.·
1992-08-05
A district court, upon resentencing following a remand for correction of an improperly imposed sentence, lacks discretion under Fed.R.Crim.P. 35 to consider post-sentencing conduct, such as exemplary prison behavior, as a basis for reducing the sentence.
-
972 F.2d 67·
4th Cir.·
1992-07-24
The court held that the statutory definition of "short-barreled shotgun" is unambiguous and includes weapons with an overall length of less than twenty-six inches, regardless of barrel length. Therefore, the defendant's modified shotgun qualified for a sentence enhancement.
-
968 F.2d 216·
2d Cir.·
1992-06-25
The court held that officers reasonably relied on a magistrate's probable cause determination under the good faith exception, despite technical warrant deficiencies, and affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress. The court also vacated and remanded Donahue's sentence for rese
-
962 F.2d 439·
5th Cir.·
1992-05-26
The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to poll the jury regarding a highly prejudicial newspaper article published during the trial.
-
963 F.2d 892·
6th Cir.·
1992-05-11
Prosecution for both a continuing criminal enterprise (CCE) and its underlying predicate offenses does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause.
-
952 F.2d 285·
9th Cir.·
1991-12-20
The court held that the Miranda warnings were adequate and there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction.
-
947 F.2d 900·
10th Cir.·
1991-10-22
The court held that the Miranda warning given to the defendant, even without explicit "at no cost" language, reasonably conveyed his right to an attorney, and thus the suppression of his post-arrest statements was improper.
-
905 F.2d 1376·
10th Cir.·
1990-06-07
The court held that a routine citizenship check at a temporary Border Patrol checkpoint, similar to those at permanent checkpoints, does not violate the Fourth Amendment. The court also found that the search of the vehicle was consensual.
-
901 F.2d 1028·
11th Cir.·
1990-05-22
The court held that the admission of a witness's prior statement, even if erroneous under hearsay rules or the confrontation clause, was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming independent evidence of guilt.
-
870 F.2d 316·
5th Cir.·
1989-04-21
The court held that a counsel's decision to call a witness, knowing the government might call them at trial, is a matter of trial strategy and does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel or a due process violation.
-
857 F.2d 686·
10th Cir.·
1988-09-14
Evidence discovered accidentally during a lawful search for a different offense is admissible, and a new trial based on cumulative or irrelevant newly discovered evidence is not warranted.
-
856 F.2d 1020·
8th Cir.·
1988-08-15
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of distribution, possession with intent to distribute, and conspiracy, and that his statements were properly admitted.
-
829 F.2d 757·
9th Cir.·
1987-10-01
The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence obtained through the use of a Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) device, as a sufficient foundation was laid regarding its reliability for generic identification and the operator's expertise.