Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine Base

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

• United States v. Edwards
  960 F.2d 278· 2d Cir.· 1992-02-28 ·cited 8×
  A district court has the authority to grant sentencing credit under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b), but a defendant released on bail, even with restrictive conditions like electronic monitoring, is not entitled to credit for that time as it does not constitute 'official detention'.
• United States v. Wider
  951 F.2d 1283· D.C. Cir.· 1991-12-13 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the motion to suppress evidence and the denial of the Jencks Act motion.
• United States v. Harrison
  931 F.2d 65· D.C. Cir.· 1991-04-19 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that severance was properly denied due to lack of specificity regarding co-defendant testimony, and that any Fifth Amendment violation regarding Black's assertion of privilege was not plain error given the strong evidence against him. Butle
• United States v. Dwayne E. Head (90-3288)
  927 F.2d 1361· 6th Cir.· 1991-03-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court's refusal to give a limiting instruction regarding firearms evidence was not prejudicial error, but vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing due to insufficient articulation of reasons for the upward departure.
• United States v. Albury
  782 F.3d 1285· 11th Cir.· 2015-04-09 ·cited 7×
  Michael Albury was convicted of narcotics and firearm offenses after police discovered cocaine, crack cocaine, N-Benzylpiperazine pills, and firearms in two hotel rooms he occupied. Albury challenged the validity of the search warrant for room 332, arguing that the warrant was ba
• United States v. Clark
  956 F.2d 1176· D.C. Cir.· 1992-02-14 ·cited 7×
  The court held that a prior state conviction, even if obtained at age seventeen, can be considered a felony for sentence enhancement purposes under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B)(iii) if classified as a felony under state law.
• United States v. Horton
  873 F.2d 180· 8th Cir.· 1989-04-18 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for possession with intent to distribute and conspiracy, and that the admission of false identification evidence was not an abuse of discretion. The court also affirmed the district court's unconstitutionality
• United States v. Ninous Isom, Jr.
  88 F.3d 920· 11th Cir.· 1996-07-19 ·cited 6×
  Five defendants convicted of drug trafficking and money laundering offenses appealed their convictions and sentences, challenging the trial court's decision to select a second panel of alternate jurors after two original jurors were excused, and arguing that this procedure violat
• United States v. Hicks
  978 F.2d 722· D.C. Cir.· 1992-11-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a defendant must renew a motion to suppress at trial to preserve for appeal evidence that might alter the standing determination. The court also vacated the sentence due to ambiguity in the sentencing court's ruling and a subsequent amendment to the Sentencing
• United States v. Garrett
  961 F.2d 743· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-09 ·cited 6×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in denying Garrett's motion for mistrial or severance, nor in denying Williams's untimely motions to suppress.
• United States v. Johnson
  952 F.2d 1407· D.C. Cir.· 1992-01-10 ·cited 6×
  A co-defendant's subsequent inculpatory testimony cannot be considered when ruling on a motion for judgment of acquittal made after the close of the government's case-in-chief.
• United States v. LaSALLE
  948 F.2d 215· 6th Cir.· 1991-11-05 ·cited 6×
  A district court cannot depart downward from the Sentencing Guidelines based on a belief that the career offender provisions are unconstitutional or create unwarranted disparities within a single case.
• United States v. Miller
  946 F.2d 1344· 8th Cir.· 1991-10-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the search of the hotel room was a lawful search incident to arrest and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in ordering the government to make its peremptory strikes before the defendant.
• United States v. Springs
  936 F.2d 1330· D.C. Cir.· 1991-06-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the admission of a pager and travel tickets was proper under Federal Rule of Evidence 404, the encounter with police did not constitute a seizure, and consent to search a tote bag extended to a container found within it.
• United States v. MacKey
  915 F.2d 69· 2d Cir.· 1990-09-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that proceeding with a criminal trial in the defendant's absence, when his absence was due to transportation issues and not a knowing and voluntary waiver, constitutes reversible error, especially when the defendant misses jury selection and key witness testimony.
• United States v. McDONALD
  877 F.2d 91· D.C. Cir.· 1989-06-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government failed to present sufficient evidence to convict McDonald of using a juvenile to sell narcotics, but affirmed other convictions.
• United States v. Ford
  993 F.2d 249· D.C. Cir.· 1993-05-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a defendant should almost always be allowed to withdraw a guilty plea before sentencing if the plea colloquy was not in substantial compliance with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11.
• United States v. Howard
  991 F.2d 195· 5th Cir.· 1993-05-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the statute was constitutional, the defendant was properly classified as a career offender, and the denial of the motion to suppress was correct.
• United States v. Butler
  988 F.2d 537· 5th Cir.· 1993-04-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred in refusing to allow the defendant to conduct an independent chemical analysis of the substance alleged to be cocaine base, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for possession of cocaine.
• United States v. Yonatan Teffera
  985 F.2d 1082· D.C. Cir.· 1993-02-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient for a reasonable juror to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant constructively possessed the drugs or aided and abetted their possession.
• United States v. Williams
  980 F.2d 1463· D.C. Cir.· 1992-12-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that expert testimony regarding the intent of a hypothetical drug possessor, clarified by the judge as general modus operandi, does not violate Federal Rule of Evidence 704(b), and that a sentencing judge lacks authority to depart downward to reduce disparity among
• United States v. Turner
  975 F.2d 490· 8th Cir.· 1992-09-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial court did not err in denying mistrial or severance motions, nor in its jury instructions or sentencing calculations.
• United States v. Jimmy Lee Church
  970 F.2d 401· 7th Cir.· 1992-08-12 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no error in the denial of the motion to suppress, the denial of the motion for judgment of acquittal, the refusal to merge counts, the jury instructions, or the evidentiary rulings.
• United States v. Hall
  969 F.2d 1102· D.C. Cir.· 1992-07-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress because the appellant's consent to search was voluntary, and there was sufficient evidence to support her conviction.
• United States v. Cameron
  953 F.2d 240· 6th Cir.· 1992-01-07 ·cited 4×
  Retrial after a mistrial declared due to manifest necessity, even if the necessity arose from publicity concerning the judge, does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• United States v. Prior
  941 F.2d 427· 6th Cir.· 1991-08-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the officer's temporary seizure of the defendant was a valid Terry stop, not an arrest, and that the jury's finding on drug quantity should be treated as advisory only.
• United States v. Hines
  943 F.2d 348· 4th Cir.· 1991-07-31 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the officers had reasonable suspicion for an investigative stop, the subsequent seizure of evidence was lawful, the jury selection was proper, the admission of parole officer testimony was not an abuse of discretion, and the sentencing determinations under the
• United States v. Senior
  935 F.2d 149· 8th Cir.· 1991-06-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in departing below the career-offender guideline range because the defendant's criminal history was overrepresented.
• United States v. Angelia Augusta Bradley
  923 F.2d 362· 5th Cir.· 1991-01-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the DEA agents had reasonable suspicion to detain the defendant based on the totality of the circumstances, including a suspicious bulge and lack of identification, and that probable cause for arrest arose when she attempted to destroy evidence.
• United States v. Carswell
  922 F.2d 876· D.C. Cir.· 1991-01-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the defendant's proposed expert witness testimony.
• United States v. GUY
  903 F.2d 1240· 9th Cir.· 1990-05-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the federal prosecution did not violate double jeopardy, the seizure of the safe was lawful, and there was sufficient evidence to support the firearm conviction.
• United States v. Hamilton
  428 F. Supp. 2d 1253· M.D. Fla.· 2006-03-16 ·cited 3×
  The court held that a sentence below the Federal Sentencing Guidelines range was warranted due to the crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparity and the defendant's specific circumstances, emphasizing judicial discretion post-Booker.
• United States v. Harriott
  976 F.2d 198· 4th Cir.· 1992-09-24 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the jury's inconsistent verdict was not grounds to overturn convictions and that the district court clearly erred in its sentencing determinations regarding Harriott's role as an organizer and his acceptance of responsibility.
• United States v. Marshall
  935 F.2d 1298· D.C. Cir.· 1991-06-11 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the district court did not err in excluding transcripts of prior inconsistent statements as they pertained to collateral matters and that the defendant's speedy trial waiver applied to charges in a superseding indictment.
• United States v. Smith
  856 F. Supp. 665· S.D. Fla.· 1994-06-14 ·cited 2×
  A prior state court plea of nolo contendere, where adjudication of guilt and imposition of sentence were withheld, does not constitute a 'conviction' for federal sentence enhancement purposes under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A).
• United States v. Longino Xavier Edelin
  996 F.2d 1238· D.C. Cir.· 1993-06-25 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the conviction for possession with intent to distribute drugs near a school but remanded for resentencing due to the district court's improper downward departure.
• United States v. Candisha S. Robinson
  997 F.2d 884· D.C. Cir.· 1993-06-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to establish that the defendant 'used' a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking offense as required by 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1), and that the district court relied on a factually inaccurate basis for a sentencing enhanc
• United States v. Thompson
  994 F.2d 864· D.C. Cir.· 1993-06-11 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed both the conviction and the sentence, finding no reversible error in the refusal of a lesser included offense instruction or in the sentencing calculation.
• United States v. Patterson
  993 F.2d 121· 6th Cir.· 1993-05-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the search of the defendant's vehicle was a valid search incident to a lawful arrest, affirming the conviction.
• United States v. Rahn Kristopher Willis
  992 F.2d 489· 4th Cir.· 1993-04-28 ·cited 2×
  A voluntary and intelligent guilty plea waives the right to challenge the conviction on grounds that an inoperable firearm is not a 'firearm' under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) or that the factual basis for the plea was insufficient.
• United States v. Harley
  990 F.2d 1340· D.C. Cir.· 1993-04-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant waived his right to challenge the suppression ruling by failing to object below, and that the admission of expert testimony was not an abuse of discretion or plain error. The court also affirmed that a lesser included offense does not require a l
• United States v. Branch
  989 F.2d 752· 5th Cir.· 1993-04-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendants' claims of Batson error, insufficient evidence, and instructional error lacked merit, and that severance was not warranted.
• United States v. McCUTCHEN
  992 F.2d 22· 3d Cir.· 1993-04-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that extrapolating drug quantity from a randomly sampled subset of vials is permissible if there is an adequate factual basis and the method is consistent with accepted standards of reliability.
• United States v. Miller
  987 F.2d 1462· 10th Cir.· 1993-03-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying an untimely motion to suppress a confession without a hearing and that the denial of a motion for a new trial based on a recantation was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Cornell Foster
  982 F.2d 551· D.C. Cir.· 1993-01-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that limiting cross-examination regarding the defendant's low cash amount upon arrest and the prosecutor's improper remarks about prior drug dealing were not harmless errors, requiring reversal.
• United States v. Burroughs
  935 F.2d 292· D.C. Cir.· 1991-05-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for a mistrial based on a co-defendant's hearsay statement.
• United States v. Vistoli-Ferroni
  783 F. Supp. 1366· S.D. Fla.· 1991-02-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant should be sentenced under guidelines for cocaine, not the enhanced penalties for cocaine base, due to the specific form of the substance and congressional intent.
• United States v. Brown
  913 F.2d 570· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the officers had a reasonable belief based on specific and articulable facts that the suspect was dangerous and might gain immediate control of weapons, justifying the warrantless search of the vehicle's passenger compartment, including the glove compartment.
• United States v. Ramos
  960 F.2d 1065· D.C. Cir.· 1992-04-14 ·cited 1×
  A passenger on a commercial bus has no reasonable expectation of privacy in a transparent bag hidden in a seat crevice, and therefore the Fourth Amendment does not protect against its search.
• United States v. Gibson
  442 F. Supp. 2d 1279· S.D. Fla.· 2006-08-09
  The court held that after Booker, it must consider the Sentencing Guidelines as advisory and impose a reasonable sentence based on the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, even if it deviates from the advisory range.