Possession With Intent To Distribute

2,528 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• United States v. Delgado
  903 F.2d 1495· 11th Cir.· 1990-06-25 ·cited 27×
  The court affirmed the drug trafficking convictions but vacated the sentences in part, remanding for re-sentencing due to errors in imposing supervised release terms for offenses committed before November 1, 1987.
• United States v. Donnie Foster
  889 F.2d 1049· 11th Cir.· 1989-12-06 ·cited 27×
  The court held that evidence of a prior, uncharged drug transaction was admissible as 'inextricably intertwined' with the charged offenses, and that the government's breach of a debriefing agreement required resentencing by a different judge.
• United States v. Barrios-Moriera
  872 F.2d 12· 2d Cir.· 1989-03-30 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the cocaine was lawfully seized under the plain view doctrine because the officer's initial intrusion was lawful, the discovery was inadvertent, and he had probable cause to believe the package contained contraband.
• United States v. Hoyos
  892 F.2d 1387· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-06 ·cited 27×
  A warrantless protective sweep of a house after an arrest outside is unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment absent specific articulable facts supporting a belief that others inside pose a threat or will destroy evidence.
• United States v. Baron
  860 F.2d 911· 9th Cir.· 1988-10-28 ·cited 27×
  The court held that Baron's detention in a darkened bedroom constituted a de facto arrest supported by probable cause, and the subsequent black light test was a lawful search incident to that arrest. The court also found that any error in admitting testimony about marijuana-relat
• United States v. Caraza
  843 F.2d 432· 11th Cir.· 1988-04-25 ·cited 27×
  The court held that a protective sweep of a residence following a lawful arrest is permissible if officers reasonably believe it is necessary for safety, and that coconspirator statements made during and in furtherance of a conspiracy are admissible. The court also affirmed the d
• United States v. Carbone
  798 F.2d 21· 1st Cir.· 1986-08-13 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the admission of authenticated and enhanced tape recordings and the use of transcripts as a jury aid were not an abuse of discretion, and that the denial of a post-trial hearing on alleged perjury was proper.
• United States v. Habib Georges Makhlouta
  790 F.2d 1400· 9th Cir.· 1986-06-02 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the prosecutor's exploitation of the defendant's post-arrest silence regarding entrapment violated the Due Process Clause and constituted plain error.
• United States v. Reeh
  780 F.2d 1541· 11th Cir.· 1986-01-27 ·cited 27×
  The Coast Guard requires reasonable suspicion of drug smuggling to stop and board foreign vessels in international waters, and such suspicion was lacking in this case.
• United States v. Mitchell
  777 F.2d 248· 5th Cir.· 1985-11-26 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for continuance, as defendants failed to show prejudice or that the denial obstructed justice. The court also found the RICO enterprise was adequately defined and proven.
• United States v. Milian-Rodriguez
  759 F.2d 1558· 11th Cir.· 1985-05-13 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the searches of Milian's business premises and home were conducted pursuant to probable cause, exigent circumstances, or valid consent, and thus the suppression of evidence was erroneous.
• United States v. Wables
  731 F.2d 440· 7th Cir.· 1984-04-09 ·cited 27×
  The court held that a trial court has discretion to fashion remedies for untimely Jencks Act material production, beyond striking testimony or declaring a mistrial, if the government acted in good faith and prejudice is curable. The court also affirmed the admissibility of busine
• United States v. Struyf
  701 F.2d 875· 11th Cir.· 1983-03-09 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the government's informant tactics did not violate due process and that the speedy trial rights of the defendants were not violated.
• United States v. Martinez
  616 F.2d 185· 5th Cir.· 1980-04-30 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the defendants' arguments regarding double jeopardy, prosecutorial misconduct, insufficiency of evidence, and the failure to provide an interpreter did not warrant reversal.
• United States v. Barclift
  514 F.2d 1073· 9th Cir.· 1975-03-12 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for mistrial or suppression, and the admission of a prior conviction was proper for limited purposes.
• United States v. Edilio Diaz
  190 F.3d 1247· 11th Cir.· 1999-09-30 ·cited 26×
  The dissenting judge argues that the conviction should be reversed due to an impermissible amendment of the indictment, prosecutorial vouching for witnesses, and a violation of due process in the forfeiture proceedings. The judge believes these errors prejudiced the defendant's s
• United States v. Ovidio Camejo
  929 F.2d 610· 11th Cir.· 1991-04-22 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding evidence of prior good conduct offered to negate intent, that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, and that various procedural and evidentiary rulings were not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. Rodriguez-Morales
  929 F.2d 780· 1st Cir.· 1991-03-27 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a canine sniff of a vehicle's exterior, when the vehicle is lawfully impounded, does not constitute a search under the Fourth Amendment. The impoundment itself was a reasonable exercise of the community caretaking function.
• United States v. Clark
  928 F.2d 639· 4th Cir.· 1991-03-20 ·cited 26×
  The court held that evidence of previously prosecuted conduct does not bar a subsequent prosecution if it only tends to prove an element of the second offense, rather than establishing the entirety of an essential element. It also held that overt acts are not required elements fo
• United States v. Schmidt
  922 F.2d 1365· 8th Cir.· 1991-01-10 ·cited 26×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the defendant's convictions for possession with intent to distribute cocaine and conspiracy to distribute cocaine, and that the jury instructions did not contain plain error.
• United States v. Aureliano Galindo Vasquez
  909 F.2d 235· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-01 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a canine sniff of a garage from a public alley is not a Fourth Amendment search, and the presence of firearms in a drug-trafficking offense can constitute 'use' under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) if they provide security and confidence. The court also affirmed the distr
• United States v. Gibbs
  904 F.2d 52· D.C. Cir.· 1990-05-29 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial judge erred by not instructing the jury on the lesser-included offense of simple possession, as a rational jury could have found the defendants guilty of simple possession but not possession with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Gant
  902 F.2d 570· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-14 ·cited 26×
  The court held that voluntary manslaughter convictions qualify a defendant as a career offender under the Sentencing Guidelines, and appellate review of a downward departure is limited.
• United States v. Ware
  897 F.2d 1538· 10th Cir.· 1990-03-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that police officers deputized as federal agents could lawfully execute a wiretap under Oklahoma law, and that evidence of prior convictions could be admitted to show scheme or motive. Enhanced sentences were upheld under the sentencing guidelines.
• United States v. Wallace
  895 F.2d 487· 8th Cir.· 1990-02-05 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the notice requirements of 21 U.S.C. § 851(a)(1) do not apply to sentence enhancements under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, and the defendant had actual notice of his prior convictions and potential sentence increase.
• United States v. Joseph
  892 F.2d 118· D.C. Cir.· 1989-12-29 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress evidence found in a tote bag, nor in dismissing a prospective juror who indicated his religious beliefs would override court instructions.
• United States v. Dalton Green
  887 F.2d 25· 1st Cir.· 1989-10-13 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting firearms and coconspirator statements, nor was the evidence insufficient for conviction.
• United States v. Trigg
  878 F.2d 1037· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-12 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the police conduct was objectively reasonable and within legal limitations, thus not violating the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Carrasquillo
  877 F.2d 73· D.C. Cir.· 1989-06-06 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the defendant's disclaimers of ownership rendered the garment bag abandoned, allowing for a warrantless search, and that any detention was supported by reasonable suspicion.
• United States v. DeVARONA
  872 F.2d 114· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-18 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction and that the joinder of defendants and charges was proper, affirming the conviction.
• United States v. The Honorable Bruce S. Jenkins
  866 F.2d 331· 10th Cir.· 1989-01-19 ·cited 26×
  Mandamus is a proper remedy to compel a district court to impose a mandatory sentence enhancement under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B) when the court improperly refuses to apply it.
• United States v. Echeverri
  854 F.2d 638· 3d Cir.· 1988-08-11 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to provide a specific unanimity instruction for the Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) count and by admitting evidence of other crimes that was not sufficiently probative. However, the erroneous admission of evidence was d
• United States v. Carlo Palella
  846 F.2d 977· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-25 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court had subject-matter jurisdiction, the heroin evidence was admissible despite a less-than-perfect chain of custody, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions. However, the court found errors in sentencing due to the misapplica
• United States v. Torres
  845 F.2d 1165· 2d Cir.· 1988-04-29 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the appellants and that the district court did not err in refusing to give a "missing witness" charge against the government.
• United States v. Romero
  836 F.2d 39· 1st Cir.· 1988-02-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that federal prosecution was not barred by a prior Puerto Rico court's suppression order, and that consecutive sentences for possession of different controlled substances were permissible.
• United States v. Woolbright
  831 F.2d 1390· 8th Cir.· 1987-10-22 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the arrest was based on probable cause, the inventory search was reasonable, and the challenged evidence was admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence.
• United States v. Dario Espinosa-Alvarez
  839 F.2d 1201· 7th Cir.· 1987-09-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the encounter between the defendant and DEA agents at the airport did not constitute an unlawful seizure under the Fourth Amendment, and the detention of his luggage was supported by reasonable suspicion.
• United States v. Manotas-Mejia
  824 F.2d 360· 5th Cir.· 1987-08-04 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed convictions for distributing and importing cocaine and conspiracy, but remanded for a new sentencing hearing for one defendant due to procedural errors.
• United States v. McKENZIE
  818 F.2d 115· 1st Cir.· 1987-05-13 ·cited 26×
  Customs officials have authority to search the baggage of individuals in transit through the United States, and possession of controlled substances within U.S. territory establishes jurisdiction for drug offenses, regardless of the intent to distribute within the U.S. or pass thr
• United States v. Peterson
  812 F.2d 486· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that evidence seized from a vessel was admissible, as the Coast Guard had statutory authority to board and search, and the good faith exception to the exclusionary rule applied to reliance on foreign law enforcement's assurances.
• United States v. Valles-Valencia
  811 F.2d 1232· 9th Cir.· 1987-02-26 ·cited 26×
  The court held that evidence discovered after an initial arrest, even if the arrest was illegal, is admissible if the illegality was not the 'but for' cause of the discovery. It also held that a conspiracy conviction cannot stand if all co-conspirators are acquitted.
• United States v. Rengifo
  789 F.2d 975· 1st Cir.· 1986-05-06 ·cited 26×
  The court held that tape recordings and their transcripts, even in a foreign language, are admissible if properly authenticated and that sending transcripts to the jury room is permissible within the trial court's discretion, especially when the jury does not understand the langu
• United States v. Driver
  776 F.2d 807· 9th Cir.· 1985-11-13 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the warrantless entry into the warehouse was not justified by exigent circumstances, but the subsequent search warrant may be valid if based on independent evidence untainted by the illegal entry.
• United States v. Delroy Thomas Davidson
  768 F.2d 1266· 11th Cir.· 1985-08-16 ·cited 26×
  The court held that while the district court erred in failing to hold a Jackson v. Denno hearing on the voluntariness of the defendant's statements, this error was harmless in light of the defendant's subsequent confession and the sufficiency of the evidence.
• United States v. Candis White
  766 F.2d 22· 1st Cir.· 1985-06-26 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court properly excluded psychiatric evidence for a diminished capacity defense and properly denied the use of a chalkboard, and that the search warrant affidavit established probable cause.
• United States v. Abdul Samad
  754 F.2d 1091· 4th Cir.· 1984-09-26 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to convict Samad of importation and possession with intent to distribute heroin, but sufficient to convict Hanan of both offenses. The court also held that a prosecutor's improper comment during closing arguments did not constitut
• United States v. Bautista
  731 F.2d 97· 1st Cir.· 1984-04-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the search of the vehicle was lawful as incident to a lawful arrest, the denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion, the co-conspirator's statements were properly admitted, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Castellanos
  731 F.2d 979· D.C. Cir.· 1984-04-06 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove intent to distribute cocaine and that the denial of the motion to suppress was proper.
• United States v. Arnott
  704 F.2d 322· 6th Cir.· 1983-04-08 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination scope, admitting co-conspirator statements, or admitting weapons evidence, and that no fundamental rights were affected by the rulings.
• United States v. Sudderth
  681 F.2d 990· 5th Cir.· 1982-08-04 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed LeCompte's convictions for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute the first marihuana load, but reversed his conviction for the second load due to insufficient evidence. Sudderth's convictions were affirmed.