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. Sierra
  622 F. Supp. 1034· S.D. Fla.· 1985-12-04 ·cited 2×
  The district court affirmed the magistrate's pretrial detention orders for both defendants, finding that no condition or combination of conditions would reasonably assure their appearance and the safety of the community.
• United States v. Tedeschi
  774 F.2d 511· 1st Cir.· 1985-09-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that at least sixteen days in May were excludable under the Speedy Trial Act, meaning the defendants received a timely trial.
• United States v. Fernandez
  772 F.2d 495· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant had standing to challenge the search of the suitcase because the government failed to present admissible evidence of abandonment.
• United States v. Breit
  767 F.2d 1084· 4th Cir.· 1985-07-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the government's failure to disclose certain witness statements did not violate Brady v. Maryland because the request for the information was general, and the undisclosed evidence was not material to the outcome of the trial.
• United States v. Eladio Cipriano and Jean Julien
  765 F.2d 610· 7th Cir.· 1985-04-22 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendants were not unlawfully seized, the search of the travel bag was proper, and there was probable cause for Cipriano's arrest.
• United States v. Dyer
  752 F.2d 591· 11th Cir.· 1985-02-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting or excluding evidence, nor was the evidence insufficient to convict the defendants.
• United States v. Leocadio Figueroa
  750 F.2d 232· 2d Cir.· 1984-12-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the admission of testimony regarding telephone conversations, which constituted inadmissible hearsay and violated the Confrontation Clause, was prejudicial error requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Perry
  740 F.2d 854· 11th Cir.· 1984-08-29 ·cited 2×
• United States v. Depee
  728 F.2d 1168· 8th Cir.· 1984-03-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an informant's tip, even with minor inaccuracies, when corroborated by independent investigation, can provide sufficient probable cause for a search warrant under the totality of the circumstances test.
• United States v. Flick
  716 F.2d 735· 9th Cir.· 1983-09-23 ·cited 2×·via Aiding And Abetting Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the motions to dismiss the indictment without a sufficient factual basis to evaluate the double jeopardy claim.
• United States v. Torgersen
  690 F.2d 682· 8th Cir.· 1982-10-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant is admissible if the lawfully obtained information in the affidavit amounts to probable cause and would have justified issuance of the warrant apart from any tainted information.
• United States v. Green
  678 F.2d 81· 8th Cir.· 1982-05-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motions for a new trial, as the evidence supported the finding that consent to search was voluntary.
• United States v. Rengifo-Castro
  620 F.2d 230· 10th Cir.· 1980-04-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the appellant's locked suitcase was unconstitutional because the luggage was under the control of authorities and there was no probable cause or exigent circumstances.
• United States v. Stark
  609 F.2d 271· 6th Cir.· 1979-11-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a formal written waiver of Miranda rights is not required, and a voluntary waiver can be inferred from the circumstances.
• United States v. Bensabat
  568 F.2d 1226· 5th Cir.· 1978-03-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the government's withholding of certain information did not violate Brady v. Maryland or the Jencks Act, and thus did not deny the defendant a fair trial.
• United States v. Jordan
  570 F.2d 635· 6th Cir.· 1978-02-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence of possession was sufficient and that the defendant's admission was voluntary and admissible, despite not signing a waiver form.
• United States v. Muro
  537 F.2d 1339· 5th Cir.· 1976-09-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for severance and relief from prejudicial error.
• United States v. Gregorio Torregrosa Castro and Luis Alberto Rosero-Rosero
  531 F.2d 739· 5th Cir.· 1976-05-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the appellants' convictions for importing and possessing cocaine with intent to distribute.
• United States v. DOE
  487 F.2d 892· 5th Cir.· 1973-11-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the conviction for distributing cocaine was valid despite acquittal on possession with intent to distribute, and that the defenses of buyer's agent and entrapment lacked merit.
• United States v. Canario-Vilomar
  128 F.4th 1374· 11th Cir.· 2025-02-18 ·cited 1×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA) is a constitutional exercise of Congress's authority under the Felonies Clause, and that the Felonies Clause is not limited by international law.
• Parker v. State
  142 So. 3d 960· Fla. 4th DCA· 2014-07-23 ·cited 1×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Dwight Parker appeals his drug trafficking convictions, challenging the admission of gun-related evidence discovered during a traffic stop that led to the vehicle search. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that evidence of the firea
• Martin v. State
  107 So. 3d 561· Fla. 1st DCA· 2013-02-27 ·cited 1×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The dissenting justice believes competent evidence exists to reject the appellant's testimony and support a conviction for possession with intent to sell.
• Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. v. Jackson
  1987 WL 61305· S.D. Fla.· 2013-01-29 ·cited 1×
  The court granted in part the motion to dismiss the counterclaim, finding insufficient factual allegations and causation, and granted in part the motion to strike affirmative defenses, treating some as denials and dismissing others with leave to replead.
• Robinson v. State
  936 So. 2d 1164· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-08-24 ·cited 1×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Robinson was convicted of possession of cocaine and possession of drug paraphernalia based on evidence found in his exclusive bedroom within a shared rental house. The appellate court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient circumstantial evidence of constructive possession
• Duke v. State
  782 So. 2d 547· Fla. 3d DCA· 2001-04-18 ·cited 1×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court affirmed the conviction because the defendant failed to raise the issue of evidentiary sufficiency in the trial court.
• United States v. Rivera
  2000 WL 340241· S.D. Fla.· 2000-03-10 ·cited 1×
  Pretrial detention is mandated because the defendant failed to rebut the statutory presumption of being a flight risk and a danger to the community, and the government presented sufficient independent evidence to support these findings.
• United States v. Georgacarakos
  988 F.2d 1289· 1st Cir.· 1993-03-30 ·cited 1×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that while the jury instructions on venue were erroneous, they did not constitute plain error because the evidence was sufficient to establish venue in Maine under either the defendant's or the informant's version of events. The court al
• United States v. Davis
  974 F.2d 182· D.C. Cir.· 1992-09-08 ·cited 1×
  The court held that prosecutorial statements about perjury, the trial court's reading of testimony, and a transcription error did not constitute reversible error, and the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• United States v. Sawyers
  963 F.2d 157· 8th Cir.· 1992-04-16 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the government's explanation for the delay in sealing wiretap recordings was objectively reasonable, and the jury instructions and evidence were sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Reyes
  782 F. Supp. 609· S.D. Fla.· 1992-01-15 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the term 'cocaine base' in 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)(iii) and U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(c)(2) is not limited to 'crack' and encompasses other smokable, non-water-soluble forms of cocaine base. The substance in question, being smokable and chemically similar to crack, fa
• United States v. Quinones-Sandoval
  943 F.2d 771· 7th Cir.· 1991-09-18 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the district court did not err in quashing the subpoena for police records or in denying the motion to suppress evidence, as the traffic stop was objectively permissible and consent to search was voluntary.
• United States v. Taglia
  925 F.2d 1031· 7th Cir.· 1991-02-19 ·cited 1×
  The court held that a defendant who breaches a plea agreement and is subsequently convicted after trial is not entitled to the protections against vindictive sentencing afforded by North Carolina v. Pearce, as no presumption of vindictiveness arises in such circumstances.
• Daniels v. State
  543 So. 2d 363· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-05-16 ·cited 1×·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The court held that the officers lacked a founded suspicion to stop and frisk the defendant, rendering the seizure of cocaine unlawful.
• United States v. Crespo
  834 F.2d 267· 2d Cir.· 1987-11-25 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the warrantless entry into the defendant's apartment was justified by exigent circumstances, and his subsequent consent to search was voluntary.
• United States v. Moore
  743 F.2d 254· 5th Cir.· 1984-09-24 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the search of the garage was within the scope of the warrant under Texas law, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in considering the account book for sentencing.
• United States v. Abel Rizo
  11th Cir.· 2026-10-27
  Non-retroactive statutory amendments to sentencing law cannot constitute, as a matter of law, an "extraordinary and compelling" reason for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). The Sentencing Commission's policy statement in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.13(b)(6), to the exte
• Legary Lugo v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2026-09-30 ·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  A trial court's failure to enter separate special provisions documents for each count, despite issuing separate corrected sentencing orders and oral pronouncements, requires reversal and remand for correction without resentencing.
• Brown v. State
  Fla. 2d DCA· 2026-09-25 ·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  Florida's use of a six-person jury for noncapital criminal cases does not violate the Sixth or Fourteenth Amendment and does not constitute fundamental error.
• Cadet v. State
  Fla. 2d DCA· 2026-06-10 ·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
• United States v. Schmitz
  11th Cir.· 2025-09-25
  The Eleventh Circuit held that a search warrant for a single address was sufficiently particular under the Fourth Amendment, even though the address contained multiple unmarked apartments, because the officers conducted a reasonable investigation and did not know or have reason t
• United States v. Brenes-Colon
  136 F.4th 1343· 11th Cir.· 2025-05-19
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the defendant's sentence, holding that the district court did not commit plain error by relying on its own experience and common sense regarding the deadliness of illegal drugs during sentencing.
• Borja v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-06-20
  The court held that the petitioner's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are meritless and procedurally barred, and his motion to amend is untimely.
• Cruickshank v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2023-09-19 ·via Aiding And Abetting Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the defendant's claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and challenges to jurisdiction lacked merit and were procedurally barred.
• Ortiz v. United States
  S.D. Fla.· 2023-04-10
  The court held that the movant's challenge to his § 924(c) and (o) convictions based on United States v. Davis is not jurisdictional and is subject to procedural default, and that the movant cannot establish cause and prejudice or actual innocence to excuse the default.
• Richman v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-01-24
  The court held that while there were plain errors in the indictment and guilty plea acceptance regarding the knowledge-of-status element, the petitioner failed to demonstrate that these errors affected his substantial rights or had a serious effect on judicial proceedings.
• Herron v. United States
  S.D. Fla.· 2020-12-03
  The court held that the movant failed to demonstrate prejudice from the alleged instructional error, and that his section 924(o) conviction was not solely based on the unconstitutionally vague residual clause of section 924(c).
• Jones v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2020-11-09
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally defaulted and without merit, and therefore denied his motion to vacate his sentence.
• Maurio Hall v. State
  Fla. 5th DCA· 2020-09-14 ·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  A conspiracy conviction cannot be sustained where the evidence shows only that one party agreed to sell and another agreed to buy a controlled substance, without evidence that both parties agreed to commit the same crime.
• Lovelace v. State
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2020-08-17 ·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
• Barr v. State
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2020-05-08 ·via Possession Of Cocaine With Intent To Sell
  The appellate court reversed a conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to sell, finding the case indistinguishable from a prior ruling. The dissenting judge argued the issue was not preserved for appeal and that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict.