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. Carmell MacKlin
  902 F.2d 1320· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the electronic surveillance was properly authorized, the information was not stale, and the necessity requirement was met. It also held that the defendant lacked standing to challenge the search of a car trunk not belonging to him.
• Moore v. State
  561 So. 2d 625· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-05-03 ·cited 10×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Jessie Moore appealed his conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to sell, challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained after a traffic stop that led to a search warrant for a motel room. The Florida First District Court of Appeal affi
• United States v. Jardee Carter
  901 F.2d 683· 8th Cir.· 1990-04-25 ·cited 10×
  The admission of drug courier profile testimony was harmless error given overwhelming evidence of guilt, and sentencing challenges were without merit.
• United States v. Santana
  898 F.2d 821· 1st Cir.· 1990-03-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for aiding and abetting the possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, and that the voice recording was properly authenticated and admitted.
• United States v. Santana
  895 F.2d 850· 1st Cir.· 1990-02-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the police had probable cause to stop and search the defendants' vehicle, making the seized cocaine admissible evidence.
• McKINNEY v. State
  559 So. 2d 621· Fla. 3d DCA· 1990-02-06 ·cited 10×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Florida appellate court affirmed conviction for cocaine possession with intent to sell but reversed sentence, holding that recent release from prison alone does not justify departure from sentencing guidelines without evidence of a continuing pattern of criminal activity.
• United States v. Caves
  890 F.2d 87· 8th Cir.· 1989-11-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the warrantless roadside search of the vehicle was permissible under the automobile exception due to probable cause, the station house search warrant was sufficiently particular, and the inventory searches of the purse were lawful.
• United States v. Miguel Nunez (88-2089) & Ernesto Rodriguez (88-2090)
  889 F.2d 1564· 6th Cir.· 1989-11-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a trial court must answer a deliberating jury's specific legal questions, and failing to do so when the jury asks whether an agreement with a government agent can constitute conspiracy is prejudicial error for a defendant whose conviction rests solely on such
• Santiago v. United States
  889 F.2d 371· 1st Cir.· 1989-11-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a petitioner seeking relief from a stand committed fine due to indigence should pursue administrative remedies rather than a § 2255 petition, and that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for possession with intent to distribute despite a contro
• United States v. Knox
  888 F.2d 585· 8th Cir.· 1989-11-03 ·cited 10×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Crack Cocaine
  The court held that the totality of circumstances, including informant tips, officer observations, and appellant's conduct, established probable cause for her arrest, and the evidence was sufficient to support her conviction for possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine.
• United States v. Dakins
  872 F.2d 1061· D.C. Cir.· 1989-04-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in excluding evidence of police misconduct, accepting a partial jury verdict, or refusing to apply the rule of consistency.
• United States v. Jackson
  863 F.2d 1168· 4th Cir.· 1989-01-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Anti-Drug Abuse Act is constitutional and that the admission of coconspirator statements and a defendant's false exculpatory statement were proper or harmless error. The evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions.
• United States v. Di Pasquale
  864 F.2d 271· 3d Cir.· 1988-12-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying a Batson hearing for Italian-Americans, denying a motion for recusal, enhancing sentences under 18 U.S.C. § 3147 without specific notice, or in its grand jury selection process.
• United States v. Roberto Ramos (87-3921)
  861 F.2d 461· 6th Cir.· 1988-11-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that evidence of co-conspirator actions after one conspirator's arrest is admissible, and that dismissing a juror for just cause and proceeding with eleven jurors is permissible under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 23(b).
• United States v. Vaughn
  859 F.2d 863· 11th Cir.· 1988-11-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that consecutive sentences for five separate convictions of possession with intent to distribute cocaine did not violate double jeopardy.
• United States v. McLAUGHLIN
  851 F.2d 283· 9th Cir.· 1988-07-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that MDMA convictions must be reversed because the DEA exceeded its authority in making MDMA illegal, but Bernauer's cocaine conviction is affirmed based on the good-faith exception to the exclusionary rule.
• United States v. Paul Douglas Hessling (87-3344)
  845 F.2d 617· 6th Cir.· 1988-04-26 ·cited 10×
• United States v. Smith
  832 F.2d 1167· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-20 ·cited 10×
  Evidence of prior and subsequent negotiations and illicit transactions, in addition to the specific sale charged, can be used to establish a seller's guilt as an aider and abettor for the recipient's possession with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Casey
  835 F.2d 148· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-13 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the defendant's conviction, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in conducting voir dire and that the verdict forms did not improperly amend the indictment.
• United States v. Varona-Algos
  819 F.2d 81· 5th Cir.· 1987-05-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the search of the appellant's luggage was lawful, either through voluntary consent or implied consent, and that any potential illegality of the initial stop was purged by this consent. The court also found no violation of the Speedy Trial Act.
• United States v. Bazan
  807 F.2d 1200· 5th Cir.· 1986-12-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a private citizen's search, even if motivated by a desire to assist law enforcement, does not violate the Fourth Amendment if the government did not know of, acquiesce in, or initiate the intrusive conduct. Graciela Flores' conviction for two conspiracy counts
• United States v. Cole
  807 F.2d 262· 1st Cir.· 1986-12-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the investigating officer's affair with a codefendant, while improper, did not violate the defendant's due process rights, interfere with his right to counsel, or vitiate the wiretap application, absent demonstrable prejudice.
• United States v. Colindres-Davila
  804 F.2d 623· 11th Cir.· 1986-11-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, but remanded for correction of the judgment.
• United States v. Diaz
  797 F.2d 99· 2d Cir.· 1986-08-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the appearance of justice was not satisfied due to the district judge's communications with the United States Attorney and a Senator regarding the defendant's case, requiring reassignment for resentencing.
• United States v. Reyes
  792 F.2d 536· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the search of the vehicle and its contents was lawful under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement because probable cause existed to believe contraband was in the vehicle, and exigent circumstances justified the warrantless search.
• United States v. McGAULEY
  786 F.2d 888· 8th Cir.· 1986-03-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the informant's tip, corroborated by police surveillance and the defendant's suspicious statements, provided probable cause for his arrest and the subsequent search warrant. Statements made by the defendant were admissible as they were either voluntary or prec
• United States v. Montoya
  782 F.2d 1554· 11th Cir.· 1986-02-27 ·cited 10×
  Possession of cocaine in the United States, even with intent to distribute it in a foreign country, is sufficient to establish guilt under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).
• United States v. Womochil
  778 F.2d 1311· 8th Cir.· 1985-12-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence obtained through wiretaps and oral communications, nor in admitting certain hearsay statements under the coconspirator exception, and that alleged prosecutorial misconduct did not warrant a mistrial.
• United States v. Morales
  737 F.2d 761· 8th Cir.· 1984-06-28 ·cited 10×
  The government waived its right to challenge the defendant's standing to contest the search of a motel room due to inconsistent arguments made throughout the litigation.
• United States v. Debbie L. and Gary Givens
  733 F.2d 339· 4th Cir.· 1984-05-02 ·cited 10×
  Defendants lacked a legitimate expectation of privacy in a package addressed to a third party, even if they were the intended recipients of its contents.
• United States v. Karo
  710 F.2d 1433· 10th Cir.· 1983-06-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that warrantless installation and monitoring of a beeper inside private residences or storage lockers violates the Fourth Amendment, and evidence obtained from a tainted search warrant must be suppressed.
• United States v. Walker
  706 F.2d 28· 1st Cir.· 1983-05-04 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for severance or in ruling that the defendant lacked standing to challenge evidence seized from a co-defendant's residence.
• United States v. Levy
  703 F.2d 791· 4th Cir.· 1983-03-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district judge erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of simple possession, as a rational jury could have found the defendant guilty of simple possession but not possession with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Moreno
  701 F.2d 815· 9th Cir.· 1983-03-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the "knock and notice" requirement of 18 U.S.C. § 3109 applied to the iron gate, and the officers' forced entry without compliance required suppression of the seized evidence.
• United States v. Octavie Fince
  670 F.2d 1356· 4th Cir.· 1982-02-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's requests for a chemist, both before and during trial, because the requests were untimely and failed to demonstrate necessity for an adequate defense.
• United States v. MacDONALD
  670 F.2d 910· 10th Cir.· 1982-02-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the investigatory stop, baggage detention for a sniff-search, and seizure of items incident to arrest were lawful under the Fourth Amendment, and thus, the evidence was admissible.
• United States v. Young
  655 F.2d 624· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in sustaining objections to irrelevant cross-examination, that sufficient evidence supported the conviction for possession with intent to distribute, and that there was no plain error in failing to instruct on simple possession.
• United States v. Bush
  623 F.2d 388· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the DEA agents had probable cause to arrest the defendant based on information from bowling alley employees and their own observations, and that the defendant had no legitimate expectation of privacy in the bag he voluntarily discarded.
• United States v. Baldwin
  621 F.2d 251· 6th Cir.· 1980-05-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Fourth Amendment does not require a warrant for undercover agents to gather evidence in plain view, even if obtained through deception.
• United States v. Aurelio Rene Raffo
  587 F.2d 199· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of guilty on charges of conspiracy to import and possess with intent to distribute cocaine, aiding and abetting importation, and possession with intent to distribute.
• United States v. DeFEIS
  530 F.2d 14· 5th Cir.· 1976-04-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an entry obtained by ruse or deception, without the application of force, does not violate 18 U.S.C. § 3109.
• United States v. Waddell
  507 F.2d 1226· 5th Cir.· 1975-02-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the jury instructions on entrapment were erroneous because they failed to inform the jury that a paid government informer, acting as a surrogate, could also perpetrate entrapment.
• United States v. Wade
  502 F.2d 144· 6th Cir.· 1974-08-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the case must be remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine if the defense counsel was misled by a court law clerk regarding jury instructions on lesser included offenses.
• United States v. Jackson Willie Gant
  487 F.2d 30· 10th Cir.· 1973-10-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motions for severance or mistrial, nor in its evidentiary rulings, as the co-defendant's testimony, while potentially prejudicial, was relevant and the defendant's own defense of entrapment opened the door
• Perez v. State
  856 So. 2d 1074· Fla. 5th DCA· 2003-10-17 ·cited 9×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Rafael Perez appeals his convictions for drug trafficking, delivery, and possession of heroin and cocaine following an undercover drug operation. The Fifth District Court of Appeal affirms all convictions, rejecting Perez's arguments regarding evidentiary rulings, discovery viola
• Ishmael D. Damen v. State
  793 So. 2d 106· Fla. 2d DCA· 2001-08-17 ·cited 9×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Ishmael Damen appeals his convictions for possession of cocaine with intent to sell and possession of counterfeit controlled substance with intent to sell. The appellate court affirmed the cocaine conviction but reversed the counterfeit substance conviction, finding insufficient
• Ford v. State
  749 So. 2d 570· Fla. 5th DCA· 2000-01-21 ·cited 9×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court held that convicting a defendant for both trafficking in cocaine and possession of cocaine with intent to sell for the same contraband in a single episode violates double jeopardy rights.
• Bellamy v. State
  696 So. 2d 1218· Fla. 2d DCA· 1997-05-30 ·cited 9×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Patrick Bellamy was arrested based on a BOLO (Be On Lookout) description of a drug suspect that the court found far too general to provide probable cause. The court reversed the conviction and suppressed the evidence, holding that the vague description and Bellamy's observed cond
• Nebraska Pritchett and Linnon Harris v. State
  677 So. 2d 317· Fla. 1st DCA· 1996-04-12 ·cited 9×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Nebraska Pritchett and Linnon Harris appeal their drug and weapons convictions, arguing the trial court erred in denying their motion to suppress evidence obtained during an investigatory stop. The court agrees that the stop lacked sufficient founded suspicion under Florida law a
• State v. Wynn
  623 So. 2d 848· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-09-10 ·cited 9×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Florida appeals a trial court's order suppressing cocaine found in a truck. The appellate court reversed, holding that the defendant abandoned his truck by leaving it unlocked and unattended in an illegal parking spot while fleeing from police, thereby eliminating any expectation