Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine

1,645 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 299 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Williams v. State
  154 So. 3d 426· Fla. 4th DCA· 2014-12-12 ·cited 12×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Adam Williams was convicted of cocaine possession with intent to sell, but the appellate court reversed because the state failed to present sufficient evidence connecting him to the cocaine found during the search. The court held that mere proximity to the drugs, combined with an
• J.W. v. State
  95 So. 3d 372· Fla. 3d DCA· 2012-08-01 ·cited 12×
  J.W., a juvenile, appealed a withholding of adjudication and probation sentence for possession with intent to distribute cocaine and resisting an officer without violence. The appellate court affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress regarding the cocaine evidence, finding J.
• Richards v. State
  37 So. 3d 925· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-06-09 ·cited 12×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  David Richards was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to sell based on evidence that he possessed seven individually wrapped bags of a white powdery substance, only one of which was laboratory tested for cocaine. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the convic
• Valentin v. State
  974 So. 2d 629· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-02-27 ·cited 12×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The state failed to present sufficient evidence to prove the defendant possessed cocaine with the intent to sell it within 1,000 feet of a public park.
• Tevorance Lesane v. State
  895 So. 2d 1231· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-03-02 ·cited 12×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Tevorance Lesane appeals his conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute within 1,000 feet of a school. The court reverses the conviction for insufficient evidence to prove intent to distribute, as the 1.8 grams of cocaine recovered was not inconsistent with pe
• Whitehurst v. State
  852 So. 2d 902· Fla. 2d DCA· 2003-08-08 ·cited 12×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Anthony Whitehurst appeals his convictions for drug possession with intent to sell and resisting arrest. The appellate court reverses his convictions, finding that the trial court committed reversible error by failing to instruct the jury that the State must prove Whitehurst knew
• United States v. Damion Anthony Campbell
  223 F.3d 1286· 11th Cir.· 2000-08-22 ·cited 12×
  The government's misconduct, including the manufacture of evidence by a Customs agent and the subsequent knowing use of that tainted evidence at trial, constitutes a constitutional error that is not subject to the harmless error rule. This misconduct deprived the defendant of due
• Brown v. State
  744 So. 2d 1184· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-11-03 ·cited 12×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court reversed a habitual offender sentence for cocaine possession with intent to sell because section 775.084(l)(a)(3) excludes controlled substance violations from habitual offender sentencing.
• Auline Thomas v. State
  743 So. 2d 1190· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-11-03 ·cited 12×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Auline Thomas appeals her jury convictions for possession of cocaine and marijuana. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirms the cocaine conviction but reverses the marijuana conviction, finding insufficient evidence that Thomas had knowledge of the marijuana's presence and il
• Schwartz Monzell Gainer v. State
  633 So. 2d 480· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-02-23 ·cited 12×
  Gainer appeals convictions for cocaine possession with intent to distribute, attempted sale/delivery, and being a principal to sale/delivery. The court reverses the possession with intent to distribute conviction because the trial court erroneously refused to instruct the jury on
• United States v. Derr
  990 F.2d 1330· D.C. Cir.· 1993-04-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove the defendant 'used' a firearm in relation to drug possession, but sufficient to prove drug possession with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Vea-Gonzales
  986 F.2d 321· 9th Cir.· 1993-02-22 ·cited 12×
  A prior conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 843(b) qualifies as a predicate offense for career offender status. However, a defendant has a constitutional right to collaterally attack prior convictions used for sentence enhancement at the sentencing hearing.
• United States v. Cojab
  978 F.2d 341· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that denying a reduction for acceptance of responsibility is not an unconstitutional penalty for asserting the Fifth Amendment privilege, and the defendant's criminal activity was 'otherwise extensive' justifying an upward adjustment.
• United States v. Candelario Gutierrez
  978 F.2d 1463· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-26 ·cited 12×
• United States v. Miller
  974 F.2d 953· 8th Cir.· 1992-08-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the use of handcuffs during an investigative stop was reasonable, and a defendant's abandonment of a bag negated a Fourth Amendment claim. It also affirmed the denial of severance motions based on a redacted confession and the admission of prior bad acts evide
• United States v. Hager
  969 F.2d 883· 10th Cir.· 1992-07-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the search warrant was supported by probable cause, the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, and the jury instructions were proper. The court also found that the defendant waived his challenge to the duplicitous nature of the indictment.
• United States v. Beckham
  968 F.2d 47· D.C. Cir.· 1992-06-19 ·cited 12×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Crack Cocaine
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that a co-conspirator's statement was admissible as an adoptive admission, but remanded for resentencing because the district court misunderstood its authority to depart downward under the Sentencing Guidelines.
• United States v. McCARTHY
  961 F.2d 972· 1st Cir.· 1992-04-15 ·cited 12×·via Aiding And Abetting Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the trial court did not err in excusing jurors for cause, admitting co-conspirator statements, admitting a telephone conversation, refusing to send cocaine packaging to the jury, determining the base offense level, adjusting for leadership role, or adjusting f
• United States v. Salazar
  958 F.2d 1285· 5th Cir.· 1992-04-10 ·cited 12×·via Aiding And Abetting Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support Ramos' convictions and reversed the district court's acquittal of Salazar, reinstating the jury verdict against her.
• United States v. Phillips
  959 F.2d 1187· 3d Cir.· 1992-03-03 ·cited 12×
• 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. Galvan
  953 F.2d 1098· 8th Cir.· 1992-01-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the airport encounter and subsequent search of the defendant's suitcase were consensual, and the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress.
• United States v. Rossy
  953 F.2d 321· 7th Cir.· 1992-01-08 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentences, holding that the district court properly refused a jury instruction, that nondisclosed evidence was not material under Brady, and that the Sentencing Guidelines were correctly applied.
• United States v. Garner
  940 F.2d 172· 6th Cir.· 1991-07-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the two-level enhancement for firearm possession under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(1) was improper because it was clearly improbable that the unloaded handgun found in a locked safe was connected to the drug offense.
• United States v. Loranza Verne Powell
  932 F.2d 1337· 9th Cir.· 1991-05-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its voir dire, jury instructions, or sentencing determination, affirming the conviction and sentence.
• United States v. Simone
  931 F.2d 1186· 7th Cir.· 1991-05-03 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the defendants waived their challenge to the indictment by not raising it pre-trial, that the jury instructions on conspiracy were proper, and that Bosko's trial counsel provided effective assistance.
• United States v. Aurelio Carrasco Lechuga and Samuel Lechuga
  925 F.2d 1035· 7th Cir.· 1991-02-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the investigatory stop of the defendants' vehicle was supported by reasonable suspicion, and the subsequent searches of the vehicle trunk and apartment were constitutional based on voluntary consent. Therefore, the convictions are affirmed.
• United States v. Link
  921 F.2d 1523· 11th Cir.· 1991-01-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported a RICO conspiracy conviction, and that the trial court did not err in denying motions to compel witness testimony or issue a missing witness instruction, nor did the convictions violate double jeopardy.
• United States v. Halliman
  923 F.2d 873· D.C. Cir.· 1991-01-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the warrantless entry into Halliman's room was justified by exigent circumstances and that the evidence found was admissible under the independent source doctrine. The court also held that Phauls was lawfully arrested based on probable cause and that his trial
• United States v. Pulley
  922 F.2d 1283· 6th Cir.· 1991-01-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that allowing two government agents to remain in the courtroom as witnesses violated Rule 615, but the error was harmless. The court also affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding no reversible error in the hearsay or sentencing departure issues.
• United States v. Martin
  920 F.2d 345· 6th Cir.· 1990-11-30 ·cited 12×
  The dissenting judge would reverse the conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute convictions, finding insufficient evidence to prove the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Doril R. Williams v. State
  569 So. 2d 1376· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-11-21 ·cited 12×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Doril Williams was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to sell, but the Florida appellate court reversed, finding insufficient evidence of intent to sell. The court vacated the conviction for the trafficking charge, struck court costs, and remanded for resentencing on
• United States v. Rogers
  918 F.2d 207· D.C. Cir.· 1990-11-09 ·cited 12×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Crack Cocaine
  The court held that evidence of prior drug distribution and beeper possession was admissible under Federal Rules of Evidence 404(b) and 403, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict for drug distribution within a school zone.
• United States v. Chareou Caprice Condelee
  915 F.2d 1206· 8th Cir.· 1990-10-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the facts known to Agent Hicks did not establish reasonable, articulable suspicion for the Terry stop.
• United States v. Cooke
  915 F.2d 250· 6th Cir.· 1990-10-01 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the denial of the motion to suppress, holding that the defendant voluntarily consented to the search of his luggage, and no seizure occurred prior to consent.
• United States v. Delgado
  914 F.2d 1062· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that venue was improper for the possession conviction but affirmed the conspiracy conviction.
• United States v. Ponce
  917 F.2d 841· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a district court may consider drug quantities beyond those specified in the count of conviction when determining a defendant's base offense level, provided those quantities are part of the same course of conduct or common scheme or plan, and the factual findin
• United States v. Friedman
  909 F.2d 705· 2d Cir.· 1990-07-17 ·cited 12×
  Improper prosecutorial remarks during summation, which undermined the presumption of innocence and the role of defense counsel, warrant reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Alexander
  907 F.2d 269· 2d Cir.· 1990-06-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the investigative stop and subsequent frisk of the defendant were reasonable under the Fourth Amendment and not so intrusive as to constitute an arrest requiring probable cause.
• United States v. Alvarez
  899 F.2d 833· 9th Cir.· 1990-03-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the initial investigatory stop, the manner of the stop, the frisk, and the search of the vehicle were all lawful, and therefore the district court erred in suppressing the evidence.
• United States v. Williams
  898 F.2d 1400· 9th Cir.· 1990-03-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the disclosure of a confidential informant's identity, nor did it err in applying the Sentencing Guidelines.
• United States v. Skidmore
  894 F.2d 925· 7th Cir.· 1990-02-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that law enforcement officials had reasonable suspicion to briefly detain the defendant's bag for inspection by a narcotics detection dog, and that sufficient evidence existed to prove knowing possession of the cocaine found within.
• United States v. Bell
  892 F.2d 959· 10th Cir.· 1989-12-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the officers lacked reasonable, articulable suspicion to seize the package based on the defendant's conduct.
• United States v. Ware
  890 F.2d 1008· 8th Cir.· 1989-11-27 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance, the Fourth Amendment was not violated by the search of the storage bin, and the girlfriend's testimony was admissible.
• United States v. Randall
  887 F.2d 1262· 5th Cir.· 1989-10-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence seized without a warrant, denying motions for mistrial, or in its sentencing decisions.
• United States v. Edwardo-Franco
  885 F.2d 1002· 2d Cir.· 1989-08-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court's conduct, including disparaging remarks about nationality and improper evidentiary rulings, created an appearance of bias, warranting a new trial for some defendants and dismissal of charges for another due to insufficient evidence.
• United States v. Evans
  883 F.2d 496· 6th Cir.· 1989-08-25 ·cited 12×·via Aiding And Abetting Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting the appointment book and the officer's testimony, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.
• United States v. Hernandez
  873 F.2d 516· 2d Cir.· 1989-04-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while proceeding with jury selection in the defendant's absence was initially permissible, the district court erred by failing to conduct a sufficient inquiry into the defendant's explanation for his absence upon his return, requiring a remand for further fact
• United States v. Armelio De La Cruz
  870 F.2d 1192· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the sentencing judge's remarks, while approaching the zone of unconstitutionality, were permissible within the context of general deterrence and balanced with individual characteristics, and that the appellate court lacked jurisdiction to hear the attorney's c
• United States v. Rodriquez-Cardenas
  866 F.2d 390· 11th Cir.· 1989-02-21 ·cited 12×
  The court held that non-black defendants lack standing to raise a Batson challenge regarding the exclusion of black jurors, and that the Sixth Amendment's fair cross-section requirement does not apply to petit juries. The court also affirmed the admission of two tape-recorded con