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
  903 So. 2d 974· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-05-04 ·cited 10×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court held that while probable cause existed for the arrest, the inventory search of the defendant's vehicle was not justified as the impoundment was not based on a legitimate purpose but rather a blanket policy. The court reversed the denial of the motion to suppress evidenc
• Vaughn Miller v. State
  847 So. 2d 1093· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-06-18 ·cited 10×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court held that the prosecutor's comment on the defendant's right to remain silent during closing arguments was an improper comment that was not harmless error, requiring reversal.
• Judd v. State
  781 So. 2d 440· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-02-28 ·cited 10×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Caroline Judd was convicted of cocaine possession with intent to sell based on officer surveillance. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, finding two critical errors: the trial court improperly refused to require the officer to disclose his surveillance location without
• Montrey Mack v. State
  711 So. 2d 1154· Fla. 2d DCA· 1998-01-16 ·cited 10×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Florida appellate court reversed drug delivery and possession convictions because the State failed to introduce the cocaine into evidence at trial, despite the defendant's timely objection.
• Young v. State
  664 So. 2d 1144· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-12-20 ·cited 10×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed Young's cocaine possession conviction, holding that the trial court improperly admitted hearsay evidence describing an informant's accusatory statement about Young's planned drug sale. The court found the admission violated the Florida
• United States v. Goines
  988 F.2d 750· 7th Cir.· 1993-03-17 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence to support the conspiracy and firearms charges against the appellants and upholding the trial court's evidentiary rulings.
• United States v. Campbell
  985 F.2d 341· 7th Cir.· 1993-02-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the conspiracy conviction and that the district court did not err in calculating the sentence, including considering acquitted conduct and hearsay testimony.
• United States v. Garcia
  983 F.2d 1160· 1st Cir.· 1993-02-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, the district judge did not err in vacating the magistrate's order compelling the informant's attendance, and the judge did not err in refusing to suppress evidence or statements.
• United States v. Claudio Gonzalez-Torres
  980 F.2d 788· 1st Cir.· 1992-11-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the district judge's questioning did not constitute plain error.
• United States v. Villasenor
  977 F.2d 331· 7th Cir.· 1992-10-08 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences for most defendants but remanded for the district court to make written findings regarding disputed facts in the presentence report for one defendant.
• United States v. Bethley
  973 F.2d 396· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-14 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding no error in the denial of due process claims, sufficiency of evidence, or sentencing calculations.
• United States v. Holt
  969 F.2d 685· 8th Cir.· 1992-07-14 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed conspiracy convictions and sentences for Perfetto and Ball, vacated CCE convictions for Holt and Perfetto, and vacated Holt's obstruction of justice sentence for a new hearing.
• United States v. Lacey
  969 F.2d 926· 10th Cir.· 1992-07-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred by imposing a consecutive sentence for the obstruction offense when it had already enhanced the underlying drug offense level, and that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction.
• United States v. Arias-Montoya
  967 F.2d 708· 1st Cir.· 1992-06-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the admission of a defendant's prior drug conviction was permissible under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) to establish knowledge, even if propensity was a factor in the inference.
• United States v. Torres
  965 F.2d 303· 7th Cir.· 1992-06-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury instructions, when viewed as a whole, did not constitute plain error, and the limitation on cross-examination was not an abuse of discretion.
• Griffin v. State
  598 So. 2d 254· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-05-11 ·cited 10×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The trial court erred in denying the appellant's motion for a continuance when the state's late disclosure of a key eyewitness prejudiced the appellant's ability to prepare an adequate defense.
• United States v. Pierre
  958 F.2d 1304· 5th Cir.· 1992-04-13 ·cited 10×
  The en banc court held that even if the agent's actions constituted a search, it was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, and the evidence obtained was admissible. The court also found sufficient evidence to support the convictions and no plain error in the prosecutor's argumen
• United States v. Harris
  956 F.2d 177· 8th Cir.· 1992-02-05 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's warrantless arrest and the subsequent search of his car were lawful, and that the prosecutor's statements and the admission of the defendant's statement were not prejudicial error.
• United States v. Sacerio
  952 F.2d 860· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants knowingly possessed cocaine with intent to distribute or voluntarily participated in a conspiracy to do so.
• United States v. Quarles
  955 F.2d 498· 8th Cir.· 1992-01-14 ·cited 10×·via Aiding And Abetting Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the evidence seized during the stops and searches was admissible, and that the convictions and sentence were supported by sufficient evidence.
• United States v. Almonte
  952 F.2d 20· 1st Cir.· 1991-12-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that cocaine seized pursuant to a warrant was admissible, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's verdict of guilt for drug conspiracy and distribution. The court also affirmed a sentence enhancement for firearm possession during a drug offense.
• United States v. Blas
  947 F.2d 1320· 7th Cir.· 1991-11-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the trial court did not err in denying production of documents used to refresh a witness's recollection, the finding regarding the quantity of drugs involved in a larger conspiracy was not clearly erroneou
• United States v. Harvey
  946 F.2d 1375· 8th Cir.· 1991-10-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the denial of the motion to suppress was proper, the conviction was supported by sufficient evidence, and the life sentence did not violate the Eighth Amendment.
• United States v. Claudio Roger Martinez
  946 F.2d 100· 9th Cir.· 1991-10-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an upward departure from sentencing based solely on the large quantity of drugs involved was impermissible when the Sentencing Guidelines already accounted for such quantities.
• United States v. Octavio Font-Ramirez
  944 F.2d 42· 1st Cir.· 1991-09-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying severance, admitting the tape recording and transcript, or applying sentencing enhancements, affirming the conviction and sentence.
• United States v. Reynaldo De Jesus Restrepo-Contreras
  942 F.2d 96· 1st Cir.· 1991-08-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that there was no impermissible variance between the charge and proof, sufficient evidence supported the conviction, and the weight of the beeswax-cocaine mixture was correctly used for sentencing.
• United States v. Guerrero
  938 F.2d 725· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's trial counsel's performance did not fall below an objective standard of reasonableness and did not prejudice the defendant, thus not constituting ineffective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Alphonso Martinez
  937 F.2d 299· 7th Cir.· 1991-07-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdicts for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and that the admission of certain testimony and prosecutorial comments did not constitute plain error.
• United States v. Ocampo
  937 F.2d 485· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to sustain Ocampo's convictions for possession with intent to distribute and conspiracy, but the search warrant was supported by probable cause and the convictions and sentences of Arango and Donato were affirmed.
• United States v. Alfaro
  935 F.2d 64· 5th Cir.· 1991-06-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the search of an employee was consensual under company policy, the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of intent to distribute drugs in a prison context, and a witness's brief mention of an informant did not warrant a mistrial.
• United States v. Ruiz
  935 F.2d 982· 8th Cir.· 1991-06-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant abandoned his Fourth Amendment privacy interest in the luggage by disclaiming ownership, thus validating the warrantless search based on third-party consent.
• United States v. Americo Olivo-Infante
  938 F.2d 1406· 1st Cir.· 1991-06-07 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on directed verdicts, severance, hearsay, and jury instructions.
• United States v. Berke
  930 F.2d 1219· 7th Cir.· 1991-04-23 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the suppression motion and the sentence imposed, finding the encounter voluntary and the sentence within statutory limits.
• United States v. Oswaldo Uribe-Velasco
  930 F.2d 1029· 2d Cir.· 1991-04-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court's findings regarding the officers' knowledge of the defendant's association with Bitti were clearly erroneous, and the initial encounter likely constituted a seizure, requiring further examination of the stop's justification and consent's vo
• Rajeev Jain v. State
  577 So. 2d 1002· Fla. 2d DCA· 1991-04-12 ·cited 10×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Rajeev Jain was charged with cocaine possession with intent to sell after police discovered cocaine during a pat-down search. The court held that the detective lacked the requisite founded suspicion to justify the Terry stop because the information relied upon was stale, and ther
• United States v. Byfield
  928 F.2d 1163· D.C. Cir.· 1991-03-29 ·cited 10×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Crack Cocaine
  The court held that a district court, when ruling on a motion for judgment of acquittal notwithstanding the verdict, must consider the entire trial record, not just the government's case-in-chief.
• United States v. Villegas
  928 F.2d 512· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the investigative stop was supported by reasonable suspicion, the search of the bag was consensual, and the Miranda warnings given to Gonzalez, though imperfectly administered, were sufficient.
• United States v. Peoples
  925 F.2d 1082· 8th Cir.· 1991-02-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the officers had reasonable suspicion to stop the suspects and a reasonable belief that the suspects were dangerous, justifying the search of the van.
• United States v. Broxton
  926 F.2d 1180· D.C. Cir.· 1991-02-01 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding that the challenges to the Sentencing Guidelines, jury selection, jury instructions, and the denial of the suppression motion were unavailing.
• United States v. Armond
  920 F.2d 480· 7th Cir.· 1990-12-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in enhancing the defendant's sentence for possession of a firearm during a drug offense, as the evidence supported the finding that the defendant knew the weapon was present and connected to the criminal activity.
• United States v. Rogers
  921 F.2d 1089· 10th Cir.· 1990-12-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that consecutive sentences under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) for multiple firearms used in a single drug trafficking offense violate the Double Jeopardy Clause, but affirmed the sufficiency of evidence for the underlying convictions.
• United States v. Dell Hester
  917 F.2d 1083· 8th Cir.· 1990-10-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant of drug offenses and that his prior conviction qualified as a felony for career offender sentencing purposes.
• United States v. Engleman
  916 F.2d 182· 4th Cir.· 1990-10-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in interpolating between sentencing levels and must determine the specific drug quantity. However, the Sentencing Guidelines are constitutional and apply to the defendant's conduct.
• United States v. Trotter
  912 F.2d 964· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-29 ·cited 10×
• United States v. Newton
  912 F.2d 212· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of prior bad acts was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) and that the sentence imposed was not excessive.
• United States v. Peters
  912 F.2d 208· 8th Cir.· 1990-08-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence seized was admissible under the plain view doctrine and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction for possession with intent to distribute, and the sentencing was proper.
• United States v. Bradley
  905 F.2d 1482· 11th Cir.· 1990-07-13 ·cited 10×
  Retrial on severed marijuana counts is not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause because the severance was manifestly necessary due to improper joinder, and the defendants did not waive their rights by seeking a complete severance.
• United States v. Monie
  907 F.2d 793· 8th Cir.· 1990-07-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant did not have a subjective expectation of privacy in the locked suitcases, thus he could not challenge the legality of the search.
• A.G. v. State
  562 So. 2d 400· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-06-05 ·cited 10×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court held that the cocaine was not the product of an illegal stop because the defendant voluntarily abandoned the bag.
• United States v. Suarez
  902 F.2d 1466· 9th Cir.· 1990-05-16 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge believes the government met tests to excuse the absence of a search warrant and would remand for further hearing on the validity of an invitation to search.