56 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 2,102 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in suspending a local rule and that its substantial upward departure from the sentencing guidelines was reasonable.
-
The court held that the chemist's report and worksheet were inadmissible hearsay under the Federal Rules of Evidence, requiring reversal and a new trial.
-
The court held that the police had probable cause to arrest DiNapoli and Papa and to search the suitcase, and therefore the contents were admissible.
-
506 F.2d 1323·
2d Cir.·
1974-10-10
·cited 231×
The court held that the government's failure to produce a key witness's letter, required under the Jencks Act, was prejudicial for some defendants, requiring a new trial on conspiracy charges, but not for others due to overwhelming independent evidence.
-
The court held that the admission of the gun was proper as it was in plain view during a lawful seizure of the vehicle, and that the defendant's statement was admissible as he failed to raise objections below.
-
A RICO conspiracy indictment adequately alleges an essential element when it charges defendants with willfully and knowingly conspiring to violate 18 U.S.C.A. § 1962(c) and describes the nature of the racketeering activities composing the alleged pattern. The definition of 'enter
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, possession of an unregistered machine gun, and using a machine gun during a drug trafficking offense, and that possession with intent to distribute qualifi
-
The court held that a defendant's status as a courier does not automatically qualify them for a 'minimal participant' reduction under the sentencing guidelines, and a district court's refusal to depart from the guidelines is not appealable if it results in a lawful sentence.
-
The court held that the pretrial restraint of assets under 21 U.S.C. § 853, which includes funds for attorneys' fees, does not violate the Sixth Amendment right to counsel of choice, as the statute does not exempt attorneys' fees and the threat of forfeiture impacts the ability t
-
The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for severance, limiting cross-examination, or in its handling of other issues raised by the defendants.
-
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.
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's convictions of all three appellants for conspiracy to distribute heroin, finding that the evidence supported a single conspiracy and each appellant's participation in it.
-
The court held that the trial court's actions regarding judicial comments, admission of 'other crimes' evidence, limitations on cross-examination, and use of transcripts did not constitute reversible error.
-
The court held that the admission of grand jury testimony under Fed.R.Ev. 804(b)(5) was proper because the declarant was unavailable due to the defendant's actions, and the defendant waived his confrontation rights by causing the unavailability. The court also found the testimony
-
The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in admitting agent opinion testimony regarding lookout activity, handwriting expert testimony, or coconspirator hearsay statements, and that sufficient evidence supported the conspiracy conviction.
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and use of a firearm to commit a felony.
-
The court held that the district court erred in denying the motion for election of counts because the conspiracy charges for cocaine and heroin were multiplicious. The court also found that the joinder of alienage counts with drug counts was proper and that the judge's comments d
-
The court held that while the district court was not required to hold an in limine hearing, it should have made explicit credibility findings when the evidence aliunde relied on witness testimony whose credibility was challenged.
-
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.
-
The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support a conspiracy conviction when the defendant's alleged coconspirators were acquitted, but affirmed the conviction for possession with intent to distribute.
-
A DEA agent has statutory authority to make a warrantless arrest for criminal contempt committed in his presence, and evidence obtained from such an arrest and subsequent search is not subject to suppression under the exclusionary rule if the officer acted in a reasonable good-fa
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for a single conspiracy and that the trial court did not err in admitting recorded conversations or denying severance motions.
-
The court held that the indictment must be dismissed because the grand jury presentation was improper due to the prosecutor's misleading use of hearsay testimony.
-
The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting coconspirator statements under Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E) and that the procedures used to determine admissibility did not violate defendants' rights.
-
The court held that the district court erred by not affording the defendant an opportunity to dispute the factual basis for an upward departure based on cocaine purity.
-
Improper prosecutorial comments during closing arguments, which personally vouched for witness credibility and suggested the government had already determined guilt, constituted plain error affecting substantial rights, requiring reversal of the conviction.
-
The court held that a defendant must satisfactorily establish concrete facts for comparison to prove pretext in a Batson claim.
-
604 F.2d 1102·
8th Cir.·
1979-08-21
·cited 124×
The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting coconspirator statements after finding sufficient independent evidence of conspiracy and did not abuse its discretion in refusing to poll the jury regarding prejudicial publicity unrelated to the defendants.
-
The court affirmed convictions for Vasquez, Sanchez, and the Mesas, but vacated Amparo Medina's conviction and remanded for further proceedings.
-
The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy to possess and possession with intent to distribute heroin.
-
The court held that the entry by an undercover agent invited into a home for a drug transaction did not require announcement under 18 U.S.C. § 3109, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions for possession with intent to distribute and conspiracy.
-
A district court must adequately articulate the grounds for an upward departure from the Sentencing Guidelines, perform the mandatory § 4A1.3 analysis, and provide defense counsel proper notice and opportunity to be heard.
-
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
-
Convictions for using a firearm during a drug trafficking crime under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) are reversed because drug trafficking is not a 'crime of violence' as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 16. Carlos Cruz's conspiracy conviction merges with his continuing criminal enterprise conviction
-
The court held that the dismissal of a conspiracy count does not automatically require reversal of convictions on substantive counts or a continuing criminal enterprise count, and that the denial of a severance was not an abuse of discretion.
-
The dissenting judge argues that sealed mail delivered to an addressee should require a warrant for search, unlike mail still in postal service possession.
-
878 F.2d 997·
7th Cir.·
1989-07-06
·cited 118×
The court held that the district court did not err in finding the defendant was an 'organizer' under the sentencing guidelines, as the factual findings were not clearly erroneous and the guidelines were correctly applied.
-
The court held that the government's decision to seek a superseding indictment with a continuing criminal enterprise charge was not vindictive, and that the defendant received a fair trial despite pretrial publicity because an impartial jury was impaneled.
-
The dissenting judge would affirm the jury's verdict and the trial court's decisions regarding evidence admissibility and joint trial.
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, that the admission of coconspirator statements was proper, and that prejudicial remarks by government witnesses were cured by the trial court's instructions, thus denying a fair trial was not reversible e
-
The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Littrell's conspiracy conviction and convictions for possession and distribution, but affirmed Davi's convictions.
-
The dissenting judge would hold that the police encounter constituted a Fourth Amendment seizure and that the officers lacked sufficient specific and articulable facts to justify the seizure, rendering any subsequent search illegal.
-
The court held that the trial court erred in its handling of coconspirator statements and committed prejudicial prosecutorial misconduct, requiring a new trial. The court also affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress evidence, finding the defendant lacked standing for most c
-
The en banc court affirmed the district court's denial of the motions to suppress, holding that the warrantless search of the house, garage, and station wagon was permissible under the Fourth Amendment.
-
The court held that the defendants' convictions were valid, affirming the trial court's decisions regarding the admissibility of evidence, the scope of the conspiracy, and procedural matters.
-
The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the conspiracy convictions, but sufficient to support Phillip's conviction for the substantive offense of heroin possession with intent to distribute.
-
The court affirmed the sentences, holding that the district court did not err in refusing to reduce White's offense level for acceptance of responsibility, properly enhanced Jackson's offense level for firearm possession, and correctly denied Jackson's request for a minor partici
-
The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the admission of scales and firearms was not unfairly prejudicial and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for possession with intent to distribute and attempted distribution.
-
The court held that the customs officials had reasonable suspicion to conduct an exterior body surface search of the appellant, which led to the discovery of contraband.
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's conviction and that the mandatory minimum sentencing provisions of 21 U.S.C. sec. 841(b)(1) are constitutional.