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

• United States v. Rodrequez
  859 F.2d 1321· 8th Cir.· 1988-10-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the government's use of peremptory strikes was not discriminatory, joinder was proper, photographic identifications were not unduly suggestive, informant identities were not required to be disclosed, and other trial rulings were not abuses of discretion.
• United States v. Clement
  854 F.2d 1116· 8th Cir.· 1988-08-25 ·cited 12×
  The majority erred by allowing the exigent circumstances exception to swallow the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement, despite a lack of evidence of imminent destruction.
• Lenny Brooks v. State
  524 So. 2d 1102· Fla. 3d DCA· 1988-05-10 ·cited 12×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Brooks was convicted of two separate cocaine possession charges and sought appellate review of denied suppression motions. The court reversed one conviction based on an unlawful pretextual traffic stop but affirmed the second conviction where cocaine was found in an abandoned veh
• United States v. Miller
  835 F.2d 187· 8th Cir.· 1987-12-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the initial encounter and subsequent searches were permissible under the Fourth Amendment, and therefore the conviction stands.
• United States v. Castello
  830 F.2d 99· 7th Cir.· 1987-09-23 ·cited 12×
  The court granted the attorney's motion to withdraw and dismissed the appeal, finding no arguable issues.
• United States v. Tito Perez, Jr.
  823 F.2d 854· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Bourjaily v. United States, which allows co-conspirator statements to be considered in determining co-conspirator status, effectively overrules the prior James test, making the admission of the statements proper.
• United States v. Taylor
  821 F.2d 1377· 9th Cir.· 1987-07-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by dismissing the indictment with prejudice due to Speedy Trial Act violations.
• United States v. Dempewolf
  817 F.2d 1318· 8th Cir.· 1987-05-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in limiting cross-examination, refusing an addict-informer instruction, admitting certain evidence, denying severance, or finding the evidence sufficient to convict.
• United States v. Diaz
  814 F.2d 454· 7th Cir.· 1987-03-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the warrantless second entry into the defendant's hotel room was lawful under the 'consent once removed' doctrine, and the seizure of evidence was permissible under the plain view doctrine.
• United States v. Arbelaez
  812 F.2d 530· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a defendant cannot be punished for both conspiracy and the underlying substantive offenses if they are not distinct under the Blockburger test, and that separate sentences for aiding and abetting possession and distribution are impermissible when arising from
• United States v. Miller
  822 F.2d 828· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-11 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence obtained from the San Francisco search warrant was admissible because the warrant was based on independent probable cause, not tainted by the prior illegal search in Atlanta. The court also held that it was not bound by the government's prior conc
• United States v. Puig
  810 F.2d 1085· 11th Cir.· 1987-02-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the border search of the boat, including drilling into its hull, was constitutional, and the defendants' statements were voluntary and admissible. Any error regarding comments on post-Miranda silence was harmless.
• United States v. Allen
  804 F.2d 244· 3d Cir.· 1986-10-30 ·cited 12×
  A district court's acceptance of a guilty plea without a sufficient factual basis, potentially due to a misunderstanding of the defendant's admissions, requires remand for the court to make that determination.
• United States v. Takeo Matsushita
  794 F.2d 46· 2d Cir.· 1986-06-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court's findings regarding probable cause for the initial seizure and the waiver of Miranda rights were ambiguous and required clarification, thus remanding those issues. Other claims were rejected.
• United States v. Romero
  780 F.2d 981· 11th Cir.· 1986-01-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court's failure to adequately advise a defendant of his right to separate counsel under Rule 44(c), combined with an actual conflict of interest arising from joint representation, mandates reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Rivera
  778 F.2d 591· 10th Cir.· 1985-12-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing an entrapment instruction for Count III, requiring reversal of that conviction, but found no reversible error in other grounds raised by the defendant.
• United States v. Gomez
  770 F.2d 251· 1st Cir.· 1985-08-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a defendant must establish a reasonable expectation of privacy in the searched area prior to trial to have standing to suppress evidence, and failure to do so waives the right to challenge admissibility at trial.
• United States v. Duncan
  763 F.2d 220· 6th Cir.· 1985-06-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant's due process rights were not violated by the pre-indictment delay and that the evidence seized from the vehicle was admissible under the Fourth Amendment's inventory search exception.
• United States v. Knobeloch
  746 F.2d 1366· 8th Cir.· 1984-10-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that exigent circumstances justified the warrantless entry and seizure of cocaine from the defendant's motel room, and thus the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress.
• United States v. Bisram Sugrim
  732 F.2d 25· 2d Cir.· 1984-04-02 ·cited 12×
  The dissent argues that the agents' actions constituted a seizure requiring probable cause, not a brief investigatory stop, and thus violated the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Hardin
  710 F.2d 1231· 7th Cir.· 1983-06-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress, as the defendant knowingly and voluntarily consented to the search of his clothing, and the admission of the DEA statistical graph was proper under the hearsay exception for public records.
• United States v. Jacobsen
  683 F.2d 296· 8th Cir.· 1982-07-27 ·cited 12×
  A warrantless chemical analysis of a package's contents by federal agents, exceeding the scope of a prior private search, violates the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Babbitt
  683 F.2d 21· 1st Cir.· 1982-07-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the prosecutor's comment, while ill-advised, was not reversible error given the ambiguous nature and the curative instruction provided. The court also affirmed the denial of the severance motion and the admission of prior arrest evidence.
• United States v. Bramble
  680 F.2d 590· 9th Cir.· 1982-06-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to give a missing witness instruction or allow related arguments, nor in restricting defense counsel's closing argument.
• United States v. Buddy Branca
  677 F.2d 59· 11th Cir.· 1982-05-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient for conviction and that the trial court did not err in denying motions for acquittal and a new trial.
• United States v. Dodier
  630 F.2d 232· 4th Cir.· 1980-09-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in suppressing the defendant's oral confessions, finding them to be voluntarily made.
• Gov't OF the Canal Zone v. Eulberg
  581 F.2d 1216· 5th Cir.· 1978-10-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the second search of the vehicle was a valid border search, and the evidence obtained was admissible.
• Wooten v. State
  361 So. 2d 167· Fla. 3d DCA· 1978-03-07 ·cited 12×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Conviction for possession with intent to sell cocaine reversed due to insufficient evidence of intent to sell, but conviction for resisting an officer with violence affirmed.
• United States v. Beverly
  562 F.2d 201· 2d Cir.· 1977-09-19 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed convictions for federal narcotics law violations, remanding only for vacation of special parole terms conflicting with the Youth Corrections Act.
• United States v. Chester
  537 F.2d 173· 5th Cir.· 1976-08-18 ·cited 12×
  The magistrate's determination of probable cause to search Chester's residence was improper because the affidavit did not establish probable cause, only mere suspicion.
• United States v. Cruz
  523 F.2d 473· 9th Cir.· 1975-09-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a specific 'no-benefit' finding under 18 U.S.C. § 4209 is not required before sentencing a 'young adult offender' under other applicable penalty provisions.
• United States v. Diaz
  503 F.2d 1025· 3d Cir.· 1974-09-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that customs authorities had sufficient suspicion to justify the border strip search, making it reasonable and not a violation of constitutional rights.
• United States v. Mariela Zapata
  497 F.2d 95· 5th Cir.· 1974-07-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the jury instruction on the intent required for importation of cocaine was prejudicially deficient, allowing for conviction on an erroneous theory of liability.
• Ward v. State
  21 So. 3d 896· Fla. 5th DCA· 2009-11-06 ·cited 11×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court held that the defendant was lawfully detained when he provided a false name, making his arrest for that offense valid.
• Darry Chaney v. State
  956 So. 2d 535· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-05-16 ·cited 11×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Darry Chaney was convicted of possession with intent to sell cocaine within 1,000 feet of a church based on evidence obtained from a warrantless search of his person. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that a citizen informant's report of observing hand-to-hand
• United States v. Rodriguez
  975 F.2d 999· 3d Cir.· 1992-09-18 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the boric acid and cocaine in the packages did not constitute a "mixture" under the Sentencing Guidelines because the cocaine was not commingled with the boric acid and the boric acid was not a usable cutting agent or distribution medium.
• United States v. Jones
  973 F.2d 928· D.C. Cir.· 1992-08-14 ·cited 11×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the evidence was legally obtained, the testimony admissible, and the sentence lawful.
• United States v. Rudas
  905 F.2d 38· 2d Cir.· 1990-06-05 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the defendant waived his Batson claim by failing to respond to the government's explanations for its peremptory challenges, and even if not waived, the explanations were sufficient and race-neutral.
• 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.
• Carr v. State
  529 So. 2d 805· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-08-10 ·cited 11×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Appellant challenged his drug conviction, arguing the search warrant should have been suppressed because it misidentified his apartment number (as unit 1 when it was actually unit 3). The Florida Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that the inaccuracy did not invalidate the warrant
• United States v. Tomaszewski
  833 F.2d 1532· 11th Cir.· 1987-12-16 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the officers had probable cause to arrest the defendant based on his behavior and the visible bulge, making the subsequent seizure of cocaine incident to a lawful arrest.
• United States v. Aldrick Pat Bailey
  830 F.2d 156· 11th Cir.· 1987-10-19 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in referring jury questions back to instructions, refusing a specific entrapment burden instruction, or admitting allegedly garbled tape recordings.
• United States v. Pulido-Baquerizo
  800 F.2d 899· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-23 ·cited 11×
  Passengers impliedly consent to a visual inspection and limited hand search of their luggage if an x-ray scan is inconclusive for weapons or explosives, as a condition of airline travel.
• United States v. Alvarez-Sanchez
  774 F.2d 1036· 11th Cir.· 1985-10-25 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Ruiz of possession with intent to distribute cocaine and that Alvarez was not unlawfully seized, thus denying his motion to suppress.
• United States v. Haley
  743 F.2d 862· 11th Cir.· 1984-10-09 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the warrantless search of Haley's airplane was a valid border search because the facts known to Customs agents prior to the search reasonably supported an inference that there was a substantial likelihood the airplane originated from a foreign location.
• United States v. Brown
  736 F.2d 807· 1st Cir.· 1984-06-07 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court must re-evaluate its denial of the defendant's speedy trial motion in light of the "reasonably necessary" time standard established in United States v. Mitchell, as the record lacks sufficient justification for the extended delay.
• United States v. Paduano
  549 F.2d 145· 9th Cir.· 1977-01-25 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the district court's entrapment instruction, which required the defendant to admit guilt to the charged acts as a prerequisite to claiming entrapment, constituted plain error requiring reversal.
• United States v. Harlin
  539 F.2d 679· 9th Cir.· 1976-07-19 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the trial court's admonition regarding perjury did not deny due process, the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction, and the sentence disparity was not substantial enough to require explanation.
• Neal v. State
  60 So. 3d 1132· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-05-11 ·cited 10×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Frankie Neal appeals his convictions for possession of cocaine with intent to sell and sale of cocaine, challenging the trial court's handling of his request for self-representation, the adequacy of inquiries regarding counsel, and his habitual offender sentencing. The Fourth Dis