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. Cianciola
  920 F.2d 1295· 6th Cir.· 1990-12-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the delay caused by the continuance from the seventy-day Speedy Trial Act period.
• United States v. Brookins
  919 F.2d 281· 5th Cir.· 1990-11-30 ·cited 4×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Crack Cocaine
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in admitting evidence of prior bad acts and that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• United States v. Knighten
  919 F.2d 80· 8th Cir.· 1990-11-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the term "any criminal sentence" in U.S.S.G. § 4A1.1(d) includes unsupervised probation, and therefore the district court properly added two points to the defendant's criminal history score.
• United States v. Ponce
  917 F.2d 846· 5th Cir.· 1990-11-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a district court may include drug quantities from co-conspirator transactions in sentencing if the defendant specifically objects to conspiracy membership and the court resolves that factual dispute.
• United States v. Sharpe Pitts, Jr.
  918 F.2d 197· D.C. Cir.· 1990-11-06 ·cited 4×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Crack Cocaine
  The court held that a missing witness instruction and argument are improper when the absent witness could only support the defendant's version of events by incriminating themselves.
• United States v. Vasquez
  918 F.2d 329· 2d Cir.· 1990-11-02 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the delays in the proceedings were excludable under the Speedy Trial Act and did not violate the defendants' constitutional rights.
• United States v. Montoya
  917 F.2d 680· 1st Cir.· 1990-11-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient for conviction and the jury instructions regarding the defendant's failure to appear were not erroneous.
• United States v. Verser
  916 F.2d 1268· 7th Cir.· 1990-10-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's claims of prosecutorial misconduct and judicial impropriety were without merit, and affirmed his convictions.
• United States v. Kelly
  913 F.2d 261· 6th Cir.· 1990-09-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an unlawful search does not automatically revoke prior consent to search, and a factual inquiry is needed to determine if consent was revoked.
• United States v. Zapata-Alvarez
  911 F.2d 1025· 5th Cir.· 1990-09-05 ·cited 4×·via Aiding And Abetting Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the federal sentencing guidelines were properly applied.
• United States v. Mancera-Londono
  912 F.2d 373· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the inevitable discovery exception to the exclusionary rule applied because the DEA's oral policy for inventory searches of rental cars was sufficiently standardized, the DEA had lawful custody of the vehicle after arrest, and the policy required searching clo
• United States v. Sanchez
  912 F.2d 18· 2d Cir.· 1990-08-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the business card into evidence, as the defendant was not prejudiced by the government's untimely disclosure.
• Adolf Alvin Mincey v. State
  563 So. 2d 811· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-06-29 ·cited 4×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Adolf Alvin Mincey was convicted of four drug offenses—two counts of possession of cocaine with intent to deliver and two counts of delivery of cocaine. The court reversed in part, holding that he could not be convicted of both delivery and possession with intent to deliver for t
• United States v. Hurtado
  899 F.2d 371· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court erred by applying the preponderance of the evidence standard instead of the clear and convincing evidence standard to determine the voluntariness of consent to search, requiring remand. The court also held that the defendant was not in custo
• United States v. Carrillo
  902 F.2d 1405· 9th Cir.· 1990-05-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress evidence, finding reasonable suspicion for the stop, voluntary consent for the extended detention, and probable cause for the arrest.
• United States v. Cirilo Mendoza
  902 F.2d 693· 8th Cir.· 1990-05-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a defendant cannot be convicted of both possessing a controlled substance with intent to distribute and distributing that same substance when the offenses arise from the same act and are part of a single transaction.
• United States v. de Leon-Reyna
  898 F.2d 486· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-20 ·cited 4×
  A warrantless investigatory stop based on erroneous factual information due to police negligence violates the Fourth Amendment, and the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule does not apply.
• United States v. Ivar Q. Blackner
  901 F.2d 853· 10th Cir.· 1990-04-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the mandatory minimum sentence provisions of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1) do not violate due process or the Eighth Amendment as applied to a drug addict, and that an orally pronounced sentence controls over a conflicting written judgment.
• Jones v. State
  558 So. 2d 131· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-03-12 ·cited 4×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reviewed a judgment and sentence for drug possession and resisting arrest. The court initially relinquished jurisdiction for a proper inquiry into the defendant's request to discharge his attorney, which led to a new trial order for one charge
• United States v. Burton
  898 F.2d 595· 8th Cir.· 1990-03-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination or in denying an absent witness instruction, and affirmed the convictions.
• United States v. Romero
  897 F.2d 47· 2d Cir.· 1990-02-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy and substantive offenses, and that the district court did not err in denying motions to suppress, sever, grant a continuance, or in its sentencing and jury charge decisions.
• United States v. Contreras
  895 F.2d 1241· 9th Cir.· 1990-02-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the phrase "may not be less than" in 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) mandates a minimum sentence, and that possession with intent to distribute is a crime 'involving' distribution under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
• United States v. DeFUNDORA
  893 F.2d 1173· 10th Cir.· 1990-01-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions for distribution of cocaine and the Travel Act violation, as lay testimony and circumstantial evidence can establish the identity of a substance, and possession after interstate travel can constitute an
• United States v. Cruz
  894 F.2d 41· 2d Cir.· 1990-01-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court properly exercised its discretion in excluding a sentencing transcript and inconsistent versions of an investigation report.
• Mercideiu Pepilus v. State
  554 So. 2d 667· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-01-05 ·cited 4×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court held that the absence of a seal on a search warrant affidavit does not render the warrant fatally defective if the officer swore to its truth.
• United States v. Crawford
  891 F.2d 680· 8th Cir.· 1989-12-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the police lacked reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant's vehicle, thus violating the Fourth Amendment.
• Laing v. United States
  891 F.2d 683· 8th Cir.· 1989-12-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that even if an arrest is pretextual, a subsequent voluntary consent to search can validate the search under the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Adams
  898 F.2d 1310· 8th Cir.· 1989-12-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of other crimes under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) and that any improper cross-examination of an alibi witness was harmless error.
• United States v. Patrick E.G. Peart
  888 F.2d 101· 11th Cir.· 1989-11-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and any error in excluding hearsay testimony regarding Miranda rights was harmless.
• United States v. Melucci
  888 F.2d 200· 1st Cir.· 1989-11-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant lacked standing to contest the search of the storage unit and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the handwriting expert's testimony.
• United States v. Gilmar Salas Morales
  880 F.2d 827· 5th Cir.· 1989-08-07 ·cited 4×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court held that the trial court did not err in applying an upward adjustment to the defendant's sentence for possession of a weapon during the commission of the offense.
• United States v. Hunt
  877 F.2d 833· 10th Cir.· 1989-06-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant of conspiracy and that the search warrant affidavits were sufficient, affirming the convictions and sentences.
• United States v. Runco
  873 F.2d 1230· 9th Cir.· 1989-04-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's actions constituted a substantial step in the commission of the crime, thus supporting his conviction for attempted possession with intent to distribute cocaine.
• United States v. Moore
  872 F.2d 251· 8th Cir.· 1989-04-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the encounter was consensual and did not violate the Fourth Amendment, and any potential Miranda violation was harmless error.
• United States v. Welton Zolicoffer
  869 F.2d 771· 3d Cir.· 1989-03-09 ·cited 4×
  The court reversed the conviction under the Travel Act because there was no proof of an overt act after the interstate travel.
• United States v. Quincy Jones
  865 F.2d 188· 8th Cir.· 1989-01-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the jury instructions adequately informed the jury of the agreement element for conspiracy and that the prosecutor's closing argument statements were fair characterizations of admitted evidence, not improper expressions of personal opinion.
• United States v. Calvo
  865 F.2d 823· 7th Cir.· 1988-12-19 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting a co-conspirator's statement after defense counsel opened the door, nor in its other evidentiary rulings, and affirmed the convictions.
• United States v. Terence Hattermann
  853 F.2d 555· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's trial counsel's alleged errors, including the failure to present expert testimony on cancerphobia, did not materially prejudice the defense, and therefore did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Oreste Ollet
  848 F.2d 1193· 11th Cir.· 1988-07-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction and sentence were proper, rejecting his claims regarding the indictment, sufficiency of evidence, and suppression of evidence.
• Martinez v. State
  526 So. 2d 1080· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-06-24 ·cited 4×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The appellate court affirmed the conviction but reversed the sentence due to the trial court's failure to provide written reasons for departing from sentencing guidelines.
• United States v. Wiley
  847 F.2d 480· 8th Cir.· 1988-05-24 ·cited 4×·via Aiding And Abetting Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  A defendant must demonstrate a legitimate expectation of privacy in the searched area to have standing to challenge a search warrant.
• United States v. Hanson
  835 F.2d 815· 11th Cir.· 1988-01-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the government need not prove the seized substance was pure cocaine, but rather that it was a mixture containing cocaine, to satisfy the statutory weight requirement for drug offenses.
• United States v. Ortiz-Rengifo
  832 F.2d 722· 2d Cir.· 1987-10-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that even if the government failed to lay a proper foundation for evidence concerning a coconspirator, the defendant's own testimony can supply the missing connection, making the evidence admissible when considering the record as a whole.
• United States v. Wiggins
  828 F.2d 1199· 6th Cir.· 1987-09-21 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant's detention did not exceed the boundaries of a permissible investigative detention, and therefore his consent to search was valid.
• United States v. Almeida-Biffi
  825 F.2d 830· 5th Cir.· 1987-08-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance and mistrial motions, that sufficient evidence supported the convictions, and that limiting evidence to a specific date was not plain error.
• United States v. Amorin
  810 F.2d 1040· 11th Cir.· 1987-02-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the defendant's car was constitutional under the automobile exception and that the seizure of firearms was valid under the plain view doctrine. Sufficient evidence also supported the conspiracy conviction.
• United States v. Bucaro
  801 F.2d 1230· 10th Cir.· 1986-09-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that co-conspirator hearsay was properly admitted because there was substantial independent evidence of a conspiracy and the defendant's participation in it.
• United States v. Stewart
  799 F.2d 580· 9th Cir.· 1986-09-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's findings adequately explained the disparity in sentencing between the defendant and his co-defendant, and that the sentence was not arbitrary.
• United States v. Burnett
  791 F.2d 64· 6th Cir.· 1986-05-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the discovery of marijuana in plain view provided probable cause to search the entire vehicle, including containers within it, justifying the seizure of cocaine found in a champagne box in the trunk.
• United States v. Trullo
  790 F.2d 205· 1st Cir.· 1986-05-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the subjective expectation of finding contraband does not invalidate an otherwise lawful inventory search of a vehicle. The objective reasonableness of the search is the controlling standard.