Possession With Intent To Distribute

2,534 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,907 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. McCOWN
  711 F.2d 1441· 9th Cir.· 1983-08-02 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions were not violated by the Speedy Trial Act, that severance was not required, and that the indictment and evidence admitted were proper.
• United States v. Onesimo Galvan, Jr.
  693 F.2d 417· 5th Cir.· 1982-12-01 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence, particularly telephone records, was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly joined a conspiracy or possessed and imported marihuana.
• United States v. Kalish
  690 F.2d 1144· 5th Cir.· 1982-07-23 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the defendant's trial on the conspiracy counts of the second indictment was barred by double jeopardy because the evidence demonstrated a single, continuing conspiracy. The court affirmed the conviction on the substantive count.
• United States v. Lueck
  678 F.2d 895· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-14 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the appellant's pre-arrest statements were admissible as they were part of a permissible border inquiry, not custodial interrogation, and the warrantless search of the vehicle and its contents was justified as a border search.
• United States v. Moreno
  649 F.2d 309· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-30 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish constructive possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting testimony regarding the past marijuana dealings of the appellant's brothers.
• United States v. Cardona
  650 F.2d 54· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-24 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for conspiracy and one possession count, but vacated convictions for another possession count due to insufficient evidence.
• United States v. Zurosky
  614 F.2d 779· 1st Cir.· 1979-12-28 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the warrantless searches of the warehouse and the truck were justified under exigent circumstances and probable cause, and that the search of the vessel was permissible under the motor vehicle exception to the warrant requirement.
• United States v. Azhocar
  581 F.2d 735· 9th Cir.· 1978-06-16 ·cited 56×
  The court held that there was probable cause for the initial search of the vehicle and that the trial judge properly denied the motion for recusal.
• United States v. Freie
  545 F.2d 1217· 9th Cir.· 1976-11-11 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conspiracy conviction for Freie, but sufficient for Joubin, Gangadean, and Gorman. The court also affirmed Joubin's conviction for assaulting a federal officer.
• United States v. Solis
  536 F.2d 880· 9th Cir.· 1976-06-02 ·cited 56×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the use of trained dogs to detect the odor of marijuana emanating from a semi-trailer, in an area open to the public, did not constitute an unlawful search under the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Molden Atkinson and Jimmy Cicero Atkinson
  512 F.2d 1235· 4th Cir.· 1975-02-24 ·cited 56×·via Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in managing the trial or in jury instructions, but that consecutive sentences for Molden Atkinson were improper for a single act.
• United States v. Miller
  492 F.2d 37· 5th Cir.· 1974-04-08 ·cited 56×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the new rule announced in Almeida-Sanchez v. United States should not be applied retroactively to searches conducted before its decision, even if the case was pending on direct appeal.
• United States v. Steinkoenig
  487 F.2d 225· 5th Cir.· 1973-11-23 ·cited 56×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the marijuana was found in a valid border search, and the admission of other evidence, even if erroneous, constituted harmless error.
• United States v. Moore
  954 F.3d 1322· 11th Cir.· 2020-03-31 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the district court did not err in shackling the defendants, mishandling a jury note, or in its application of Rehaif v. United States, affirming the convictions.
• United States v. Thompson
  944 F.2d 1331· 7th Cir.· 1991-09-18 ·cited 55×
  The court affirmed convictions for some appellants, but vacated and remanded sentences for others, finding no abuse of discretion in the district court's rulings on grand jury use, wiretaps, and evidence production.
• United States v. Malin
  908 F.2d 163· 7th Cir.· 1990-07-19 ·cited 55×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that probable cause supported the search warrant and that the jury instructions and evidence were sufficient for the firearm offense conviction.
• United States v. Brown
  859 F.2d 974· D.C. Cir.· 1988-10-21 ·cited 55×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine Base
  The court held that the statute's definition of 'cocaine base' is not unconstitutionally vague and the mandatory minimum sentence does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment.
• United States v. Penagos
  823 F.2d 346· 9th Cir.· 1987-07-29 ·cited 55×·via Possession Of Narcotics With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute narcotics and possession with intent to distribute narcotics.
• United States v. Rivera
  825 F.2d 152· 7th Cir.· 1987-07-20 ·cited 55×
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences, holding that warrantless entry into a hotel room was justified by exigent circumstances, seizure of suitcases was permissible under plain view, and the automobile exception allowed warrantless search of a vehicle.
• United States v. Hakeem Freeland Segon Funisho Noibi
  780 F.2d 1419· 8th Cir.· 1986-01-07 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to prove the defendant's knowledge and possession of heroin with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Rackley
  742 F.2d 1266· 11th Cir.· 1984-02-13 ·cited 55×
  The court held that neither appellant had a legitimate expectation of privacy to contest the search, and that the search was valid due to consent and subsequent warrants; however, the evidence was insufficient to convict Crosby.
• United States v. Slade
  627 F.2d 293· D.C. Cir.· 1980-03-04 ·cited 55×
  The court held that while errors occurred, they did not contribute to the conviction, except for appellant Watson.
• United States v. Martinez
  514 F.2d 334· 9th Cir.· 1975-02-28 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the jury instruction regarding inferring knowledge from driving was erroneous and prejudicial, requiring a new trial for Martinez. For Sidle, the evidence for the residue quantity was insufficient, and a prosecutor's improper argument required a new trial on t
• United States v. Osborne
  931 F.2d 1139· 7th Cir.· 1991-04-22 ·cited 54×
  The appellate court affirmed the validity of an antenuptial agreement but reversed the trial court's modification of its terms regarding alimony and its award of the marital home.
• United States v. Townley
  929 F.2d 365· 8th Cir.· 1991-03-27 ·cited 54×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the search warrant was valid under the good faith exception and the evidence was sufficient for the firearm conviction, but reversed the sentencing enhancement based on uncharged drug quantities due to insufficient evidence.
• United States v. Young-Bey
  893 F.2d 178· 8th Cir.· 1990-01-04 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Batson, and the evidence was sufficient to convict him of using a firearm during a drug trafficking offense.
• United States v. Lyman
  892 F.2d 751· 8th Cir.· 1989-12-29 ·cited 54×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  Mere possession of a firearm is insufficient for a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1), but the totality of circumstances here, including the gun's location in the area of drug transactions, provided a sufficient nexus to infer intent to use.
• United States v. Davis
  882 F.2d 1334· 8th Cir.· 1989-08-22 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the search of the vehicle was a lawful inventory search, joinder and severance were proper, jury instructions were appropriate, evidence was admissible, and the wiretap was lawful.
• United States v. Bond
  847 F.2d 1233· 7th Cir.· 1988-05-16 ·cited 54×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences, finding sufficient evidence for CCE status, upholding joint trials, and allowing admission of evidence and denial of recusal motions.
• United States v. Kinsey
  843 F.2d 383· 9th Cir.· 1988-04-01 ·cited 54×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine Base
  The court held that the admission of expert testimony was proper, defendants lacked standing to challenge a co-defendant's arrest, sentence enhancement provisions do not violate the right to a jury trial, and mandatory minimum penalties do not violate the Eighth Amendment or sepa
• United States v. McKENNON
  814 F.2d 1539· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-20 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the defendant lacked a legitimate expectation of privacy in the searched luggage, and therefore lacked standing to challenge the search under the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Wajda
  810 F.2d 754· 8th Cir.· 1987-01-26 ·cited 54×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence for possession and conspiracy, probable cause for arrests and searches, and no prosecutorial misconduct.
• United States v. Bollinger
  796 F.2d 1394· 11th Cir.· 1986-08-15 ·cited 54×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that a defendant waives a juror misconduct claim by failing to report it before the verdict, and that other claims lacked merit or sufficient proof.
• United States v. Stitzer
  785 F.2d 1506· 11th Cir.· 1986-04-07 ·cited 54×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court affirmed the convictions of all appellants, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings regarding guilty pleas, evidentiary decisions, or the admission of evidence.
• United States v. Barker
  771 F.2d 1362· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-20 ·cited 54×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by failing to adequately consider individualized factors in sentencing, imposing maximum sentences based on the crime's magnitude and general deterrence rather than the defendants' culpability.
• United States v. Aiello
  771 F.2d 621· 2d Cir.· 1985-08-07 ·cited 54×
  The court affirmed convictions, finding no reversible error in evidentiary rulings or the handling of juror contact, except for a procedural issue regarding Scaduto's lesser-included offenses.
• United States v. Ginsberg
  758 F.2d 823· 2d Cir.· 1985-03-26 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the surveillance officers had probable cause to arrest Piedrahita, that Albeiro's statement was admissible co-conspirator hearsay, that sufficient evidence supported the convictions, and that Ginsberg's conviction for possession was supported by evidence of ai
• United States v. Noti
  731 F.2d 610· 9th Cir.· 1984-04-17 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the Miranda warnings given to the defendant were defective because they failed to inform him of his right to have counsel present during questioning, and the admission of his post-arrest statements was not harmless error.
• United States v. German Ceballos
  706 F.2d 1198· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-10 ·cited 54×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the boarding was lawful under the Coast Guard's authority, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for drug possession, importation, and conspiracy.
• United States v. Burns
  684 F.2d 1066· 2d Cir.· 1982-07-21 ·cited 54×·via Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the district court properly denied motions to suppress evidence seized during the arrest and post-arrest statements, and that the defendant's post-arrest statements to an Assistant U.S. Attorney, though obtained in violation of Edwards v. Arizona, constituted
• United States v. Moccia
  681 F.2d 61· 1st Cir.· 1982-06-16 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the admission of a prior conviction for impeachment purposes was proper under Rule 404(b) and that the jury instructions regarding lesser included offenses were adequate. The court also affirmed the enhanced sentence under the Dangerous Special Drug Offender s
• United States v. Jodoin
  672 F.2d 232· 1st Cir.· 1982-03-08 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the evidence was admissible, the trial was timely under the Speedy Trial Act, and the jury instructions were proper, affirming the conviction.
• Zeinida Morales v. State
  407 So. 2d 321· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-12-15 ·cited 54×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Sell
  The Florida appellate court upheld convictions for marijuana possession arising from a warrantless search of vessels in U.S. territorial waters, holding that the search constituted a lawful border search exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement, despite the governmen
• United States v. Patino
  649 F.2d 724· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-29 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the initial police encounter with the defendant constituted a seizure under the Fourth Amendment and that the evidence obtained was tainted by this unlawful seizure.
• United States v. Perez
  648 F.2d 219· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-15 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conspiracy convictions and that the submission of written jury instructions was not prejudicial error. The court vacated Perez's special parole term as it cannot be imposed for violations of 21 U.S.C. § 846.
• United States v. Bowles
  625 F.2d 526· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-02 ·cited 54×
• United States v. Walker
  621 F.2d 163· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-09 ·cited 54×
  The court held that a jury instruction on aiding and abetting is permissible even when the defendant is charged only with conspiracy, and that consecutive sentences for dual-objective conspiracies are proper.
• United States v. McGRATH
  613 F.2d 361· 2d Cir.· 1979-12-10 ·cited 54×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the district court properly denied motions to suppress evidence seized without a warrant from a van and a briefcase, and that the indictment and trial were timely under the Speedy Trial Act.
• United States v. Gomez
  593 F.2d 210· 3d Cir.· 1979-02-02 ·cited 54×
  The court held that a separate conviction for possession with intent to distribute is impermissible when the possession is an essential element of the distribution offense charged and proven.
• United States v. GAY
  567 F.2d 916· 9th Cir.· 1978-01-19 ·cited 54×·via Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for severance based on a co-defendant's conditional offer to provide exculpatory testimony.