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. Lorgio D. Morales, Jr.
  861 F.2d 396· 3d Cir.· 1988-11-16 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the district court's suppression order, arguing that the driver did not have apparent authority to consent to the search of an enclosed compartment when the lessee was present.
• United States v. Janeth Grizales
  859 F.2d 442· 7th Cir.· 1988-09-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that sufficient evidence, including circumstantial corroboration of post-arrest statements, supported the conviction, and that the sentence was properly imposed.
• United States v. Migueles
  856 F.2d 117· 11th Cir.· 1988-08-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence presented was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of conspiring to possess and possessing with intent to distribute cocaine.
• Leeks v. State
  529 So. 2d 787· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-07-29 ·cited 8×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Hubert Leeks was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to sell and sale of cocaine. He appealed challenging both his trial court's restriction on his ability to display a facial scar to the jury and the constitutionality of receiving separate convictions for possession w
• United States v. Quintero
  848 F.2d 154· 11th Cir.· 1988-06-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the sealed boxes was permissible under the Fourth Amendment because the contents were previously lawfully discovered and there was no substantial likelihood the contents had been changed. The evidence was also sufficient to support th
• United States v. Garcia
  848 F.2d 58· 4th Cir.· 1988-06-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the DEA agents had probable cause to arrest the defendant based on the totality of the circumstances, including drug courier profile characteristics, suspicious behavior, and a large quantity of cocaine found.
• United States v. Pillow
  842 F.2d 1001· 8th Cir.· 1988-03-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress evidence and affirmed the conviction, finding the stop, seizure, and search warrant were lawful.
• United States v. Chavez
  812 F.2d 1295· 10th Cir.· 1987-03-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the garage, the detention and arrest of the defendant, and the subsequent pat-down search were all lawful, supported by probable cause and exigent circumstances.
• United States v. Souder
  782 F.2d 1534· 11th Cir.· 1986-02-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the absence of counsel at sentencing invalidates the sentences, requiring remand for resentencing. However, other aspects of the judgment were affirmed.
• United States v. LEE
  782 F.2d 133· 8th Cir.· 1986-01-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that there was no fatal variance between the indictment and the evidence presented, and that the defendant received effective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Caminos
  770 F.2d 361· 3d Cir.· 1985-08-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Pittsburgh International Airport can be considered the functional equivalent of a border for Fourth Amendment purposes when a package arrives from a foreign point of departure and remains under customs bond until searched at its final destination. The court al
• United States v. Avery
  760 F.2d 1219· 11th Cir.· 1985-05-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Arthur Avery's perjury count was properly joined and severance was not warranted, but Alisa Avery's conviction must be reversed due to a Bruton violation from her father's grand jury testimony.
• United States v. Moreno
  758 F.2d 425· 9th Cir.· 1985-04-16 ·cited 8×
  Evidence obtained after an illegal entry but pursuant to a subsequently obtained valid warrant is admissible if the warrant was not based on information from the illegal entry.
• United States v. Bubis
  744 F.2d 61· 8th Cir.· 1984-09-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the totality of the circumstances provided probable cause for the warrantless arrest of Bubis, and consequently, the arrest of Bass and the seizure of evidence were lawful.
• United States v. Gonzalez
  736 F.2d 981· 4th Cir.· 1984-06-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial judge erred by failing to make a preliminary finding on the voluntariness of the defendant's incriminating statement before submitting it to the jury.
• United States v. Rubin
  733 F.2d 837· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the second indictment without prejudice due to a miscalculation of the Speedy Trial Act period, and that restrictions on cross-examination and defense witness testimony were not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Large
  729 F.2d 636· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the DEA agents had reasonable suspicion to conduct an investigatory stop and probable cause to seize the appellant's suitcase, and that the admission of cash evidence was proper.
• United States v. Viafara-Rodriguez
  729 F.2d 912· 2d Cir.· 1984-02-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the jury instructions, when viewed as a whole, adequately informed the jury that the government's burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt applied to each element of the charged offenses, despite potentially confusing language.
• United States v. Sarmiento-Perez
  724 F.2d 898· 11th Cir.· 1984-02-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to connect the defendant to the cocaine, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting it.
• United States v. Gonzalo Salvador Martin Tello
  707 F.2d 85· 4th Cir.· 1983-05-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district judge's supplemental jury instructions indicated a predilection for a guilty verdict, denying the defendant a fair and impartial trial.
• United States v. Piccolo
  696 F.2d 1162· 6th Cir.· 1983-01-04 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the conspiracy conviction must be reversed due to a vague indictment and insufficient jury instructions that failed to connect the law to the specific facts of the case. The court also remanded for resentencing on the possession and distribution counts due to
• United States v. Brooks
  670 F.2d 625· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's statements were admissible because they were not made in the context of a plea bargain and that evidence of marijuana possession was admissible as part of the same transaction or under Rule 404(b).
• United States v. Romo
  669 F.2d 285· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-03 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the admission of "guilt by association" testimony, concerning the prior convictions of the defendant's acquaintances, was highly prejudicial and reversible error, especially without a proper curative instruction.
• United States v. Attell
  655 F.2d 703· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to poll the jury regarding prejudicial publicity and in failing to adequately instruct the jury on the definition of 'agent' in the context of an entrapment defense.
• United States v. Willis
  647 F.2d 54· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court's refusal to permit cross-examination of a government witness regarding his bias violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses against him, requiring reversal of both convictions.
• United States v. Arias
  639 F.2d 1183· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Government sufficiently proved the seized substance was L-cocaine beyond a reasonable doubt and that Arias's conviction for telephone use was not impermissibly inconsistent with his acquittal on other charges.
• Sizemore v. State
  390 So. 2d 401· Fla. 3d DCA· 1980-11-04 ·cited 8×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Sizemore was convicted of drug possession after narcotics officers obtained his consent to allow a trained dog to sniff his briefcase at an airport, which led to probable cause for a search warrant. The court affirmed, holding that his consent to the dog sniff was freely and volu
• United States v. Sindin
  620 F.2d 87· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-26 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court had subject matter jurisdiction and that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of guilt for importing cocaine and possessing it with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Vargas
  621 F.2d 54· 2d Cir.· 1980-05-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the search warrant was sufficiently specific and the seizure of additional furniture was justified under the plain view doctrine.
• United States v. Montoya
  612 F.2d 792· 3d Cir.· 1980-01-11 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying a sentencing hearing when the government limited its reliance to the facts of the present charge and the judge was not affected by disputed characterizations. However, the court vacated the special parole term as it wa
• United States v. Efren Cortes
  606 F.2d 511· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a defendant is not entitled to force the government to elect between charges of possession with intent to distribute and actual distribution when both arise from a single transaction and concurrent sentences are imposed.
• United States v. Marks
  603 F.2d 582· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's statements were admissible because they were not made during custodial interrogation and co-conspirator statements were properly admitted.
• United States v. Havens
  592 F.2d 848· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that illegally seized evidence cannot be used for impeachment if the defendant's testimony on direct examination did not open the door to the subject matter.
• United States v. Demasco Ramon Diaz
  585 F.2d 116· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the failure of the trial judge to sua sponte give a limiting instruction regarding prior convictions for the same offense constitutes reversible error.
• United States v. Richardson
  580 F.2d 946· 9th Cir.· 1978-06-30 ·cited 8×
  Prosecution by a foreign sovereign does not bar subsequent prosecution by the United States on double jeopardy grounds.
• United States v. Solow
  574 F.2d 1318· 5th Cir.· 1978-06-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the classification of cocaine as a Schedule II narcotic drug under the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 is constitutional and has a rational basis.
• United States v. Amparo del Soccorro Castro De Graulau
  573 F.2d 213· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-17 ·cited 8×
  Statements made by the defendant to customs agents before being informed of her Miranda rights were inadmissible because she was in custodial interrogation.
• United States v. Wheaton
  557 F.2d 275· 1st Cir.· 1977-06-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the sentencing judge did not err by relying on his understanding of cocaine's properties and did not abuse his discretion in denying an evidentiary hearing.
• United States v. Weaklem
  517 F.2d 70· 9th Cir.· 1975-05-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the warrantless arrest and seizure of cocaine were lawful under the circumstances.
• United States v. Nunez
  1 F.4th 976· 11th Cir.· 2021-06-17 ·cited 7×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the United States had jurisdiction over the smugglers' stateless vessel under the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act, sufficient evidence supported their convictions, and the district court did not err in limiting cross-examination.
• 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. Olgivie O'Brien Williams
  985 F.2d 634· 1st Cir.· 1993-02-12 ·cited 7×
• United States v. Withers
  972 F.2d 837· 7th Cir.· 1992-08-14 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the initial encounter was consensual, evolving into a lawful investigatory stop based on reasonable suspicion, and that the detention of the bag was reasonable. Discovery and continuance issues were also resolved against the defendant.
• United States v. Lejon Robins
  967 F.2d 1387· 9th Cir.· 1992-06-24 ·cited 7×
  The court held that cornmeal, used to mimic the appearance of cocaine bricks and not as a diluent or carrier facilitating distribution, does not constitute a 'mixture or substance' under Sentencing Guidelines § 2D1.1(c) for the purpose of calculating drug weight.
• United States v. Somers
  950 F.2d 1279· 7th Cir.· 1991-12-12 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the defendant's convictions were not barred by double jeopardy, the indictments were not facially insufficient, and the evidence seized was admissible.
• United States v. Tobin
  840 F.2d 867· 11th Cir.· 1988-03-23 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the delay caused by a codefendant's fugitive status was excludable under the Speedy Trial Act, and the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of prior bad acts or denying the motion for acquittal.
• Bedford v. State
  995 So. 2d 1122· Fla. 4th DCA· 2008-12-03 ·cited 6×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
• Mitchell v. State
  911 So. 2d 1278· Fla. 4th DCA· 2005-10-05 ·cited 6×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Tommy Mitchell was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to sell after police found cocaine at a property where he was arrested while fleeing. The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed for a new trial because the state prosecutor impermissibly commented on Mit
• Sharod Dozier v. State
  766 So. 2d 1105· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-08-16 ·cited 6×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Sharod Dozier appeals his cocaine possession conviction, challenging the validity of the traffic stop that led to the discovery of drugs. The Florida appellate court reversed, holding that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion to stop Dozier's vehicle based solely on informatio
• Green v. State
  754 So. 2d 163· Fla. 5th DCA· 2000-03-31 ·cited 6×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to sell or deliver, as it showed more than mere proximity.