Possession With Intent To Distribute

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

• United States v. Nevarez-Arreola
  885 F.2d 243· 5th Cir.· 1989-09-22 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court's findings denying downward adjustments for minimal participant status and acceptance of responsibility were not clearly erroneous, and thus affirmed the sentence.
• United States v. Bernal
  884 F.2d 1518· 1st Cir.· 1989-09-14 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of both appellants, finding no merit in their challenges regarding sentencing, evidentiary rulings, or sufficiency of evidence.
• United States v. Velasquez
  885 F.2d 1076· 3d Cir.· 1989-09-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that while voluntariness of a waiver is subject to plenary review, a trial court's direct exposure to the evidence and the defendant can provide valuable insight, warranting a remand for its determination.
• United States v. Irwin Posner
  868 F.2d 720· 5th Cir.· 1989-03-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for possession with intent to distribute, but the defendant was denied his right to allocution and must be resentenced.
• United States v. Hall
  854 F.2d 1036· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-16 ·cited 24×
  While not strictly forbidden, judges are generally advised against defining reasonable doubt as attempts often create more confusion than clarity.
• United States v. Elliott
  849 F.2d 554· 11th Cir.· 1988-07-14 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant's arguments regarding speedy trial, governmental misconduct, evidentiary rulings, and procedural issues lacked merit.
• United States v. Bates
  840 F.2d 858· 11th Cir.· 1988-03-23 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for violating the Travel Act must be reversed due to insufficient evidence of a 'business enterprise,' but affirmed his conviction for possession with intent to distribute cocaine.
• United States v. Nechy
  827 F.2d 1161· 7th Cir.· 1987-08-27 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the administrative search was lawful, even if motivated by criminal investigation, and that the variance between the indictment and proof was harmless error.
• United States v. Giraldo
  822 F.2d 205· 2d Cir.· 1987-06-04 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the defendant was not denied a fair trial by the mid-trial sentencing of a co-conspirator, nor were tape recordings improperly admitted or used.
• United States v. Vidal-Hungria
  794 F.2d 1503· 11th Cir.· 1986-07-25 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the captain's convictions, finding no double jeopardy, but reversed the crew members' convictions due to insufficient evidence.
• United States v. Puglisi
  790 F.2d 240· 2d Cir.· 1986-05-08 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed all convictions, holding that wiretap warrants were properly issued, the government was not required to prove the specific isomer of cocaine involved before 1984, post-arrest statements were properly excluded, and consent to search was voluntary.
• United States v. Rambo
  789 F.2d 1289· 8th Cir.· 1986-04-25 ·cited 24×
  A warrantless arrest in a hotel room for a misdemeanor is permissible under state law if probable cause exists for a closely related offense, and Fourth Amendment protections do not apply if the defendant has been justifiably ejected and lost a reasonable expectation of privacy.
• United States v. Tolliver
  780 F.2d 1177· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the conspiracy and possession convictions for Scott and Onick, reversing their convictions. The court affirmed the convictions for Tolliver, Perrett, and Galvan-Venegas, finding probable cause for their arrests.
• United States v. Roth
  777 F.2d 1200· 7th Cir.· 1985-11-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that prosecutorial misconduct did not warrant dismissal of the indictment and that there was sufficient evidence for admitting extrajudicial statements.
• United States v. Peterson
  768 F.2d 64· 2d Cir.· 1985-07-22 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict for distribution and possession with intent to distribute heroin, and that the jury instructions, despite potential ambiguity, did not constitute plain error.
• United States v. Fermin Enrique Bergouignan
  764 F.2d 1503· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-12 ·cited 24×
  The court remanded the Speedy Trial Act claims for Bergouignan and Godoy to the district court for a determination of excludable days, while affirming Simone's convictions.
• United States v. Williams
  754 F.2d 672· 6th Cir.· 1985-02-15 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the airport search and seizure of cocaine were constitutional, based on reasonable suspicion for an investigatory stop and voluntary consent to search.
• United States v. Rodrigo Henao-Castano
  729 F.2d 1364· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-16 ·cited 24×
• United States v. Caicedo-Guarnizo
  723 F.2d 1420· 9th Cir.· 1984-01-16 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the extended border search was valid and the appellant's consent to the x-ray search was voluntary, affirming the conviction.
• United States v. del Aguila-Reyes
  722 F.2d 155· 5th Cir.· 1983-12-23 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to prove the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Piccolo
  723 F.2d 1234· 6th Cir.· 1983-12-16 ·cited 24×
  The indictment was insufficient because it lacked the specificity required to link the grand jury's concerns to the evidence presented at trial.
• United States v. Daniels
  723 F.2d 31· 8th Cir.· 1983-12-12 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting police testimony about drug dealers using front men, nor in denying a new trial based on alleged perjured testimony.
• United States v. Garcia-Duarte
  718 F.2d 42· 2d Cir.· 1983-09-21 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of a customer book was erroneous and insufficient to support a conspiracy conviction, and that the defendant was entitled to a lesser-included offense charge for simple possession.
• United States v. Freire
  710 F.2d 1515· 11th Cir.· 1983-08-01 ·cited 24×
  The Court held that the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Ross, which expanded the scope of the automobile exception to the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement, applies retroactively to cases pending on appeal. Therefore, evidence seized from briefcases found in a v
• United States v. Eusebio Whittaker Bent
  707 F.2d 1190· 11th Cir.· 1983-06-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court properly denied the motion to suppress evidence seized from the vessel, admitted co-conspirator statements, denied severance motions, admitted extrinsic evidence, allowed cross-examination on prior drug smuggling, and gave a proper supplemental
• United States v. Gaertner
  705 F.2d 210· 7th Cir.· 1983-04-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the search warrant affidavit was sufficient, the informant's statements were properly excluded as hearsay, prior drug convictions were admissible for impeachment, rebuttal testimony was properly admitted, and the sentence was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Bulgatz
  693 F.2d 728· 8th Cir.· 1982-11-10 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the affidavit provided sufficient probable cause for the search warrant, the trial court properly denied a motion to reopen the suppression hearing due to a lack of proof of misstatement, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance
• United States v. Winston
  687 F.2d 832· 6th Cir.· 1982-08-31 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the defendant's actions in facilitating a drug transaction, including introducing the parties, arranging the meeting, and quoting prices, were sufficient to constitute aiding and abetting, even without a direct financial stake.
• United States v. Ehlebracht
  693 F.2d 333· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-10 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the appellant's consent to accompany the agent to an office was voluntary, the subsequent arrest for providing false identification was lawful, and the search incident to that arrest was permissible, leading to the affirmance of his conviction.
• United States v. Sanford
  658 F.2d 342· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-05 ·cited 24×
  The court's majority unnecessarily decided the issue of reasonable suspicion for a Terry stop, which was not required for affirming the lower court's decision.
• United States v. Pennington
  635 F.2d 1387· 10th Cir.· 1980-12-03 ·cited 24×
  The dissent argues that evidence seized pursuant to a warrant not executed by a federal officer should be suppressed, rejecting the majority's application of the 'harmless error' rule.
• United States v. Warren
  594 F.2d 1046· 5th Cir.· 1979-05-09 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the search at the functional equivalent of the border was lawful without probable cause, and that the district court did not err in denying motions for mistrial or discharging the jury panel, nor was the evidence insufficient for constructive possession.
• United States v. Pugh
  566 F.2d 626· 8th Cir.· 1977-12-14 ·cited 24×
  The court held that evidence seized from a partially open briefcase in a car was admissible under the plain view doctrine, and the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for possession with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Cleora King
  567 F.2d 785· 8th Cir.· 1977-12-12 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying motions for severance, suppressing evidence, or refusing lesser-included offense instructions, affirming the convictions.
• Ridgeway v. United States
  558 F.2d 357· 6th Cir.· 1977-07-13 ·cited 24×
  A writ of habeas corpus ad prosequendum is not a detainer under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers, and therefore does not trigger the Agreement's dismissal provisions.
• United States v. Binetti
  547 F.2d 265· 5th Cir.· 1977-02-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the defendant's conviction for conspiracy and that the trial court did not err in its rulings.
• United States v. Toral
  536 F.2d 893· 9th Cir.· 1976-06-10 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the affidavit provided sufficient probable cause for the search warrant and that the appellant's post-Miranda confession was not tainted by prior statements.
• United States v. Riebschlaeger
  528 F.2d 1031· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that prior service on similar cases by jurors does not create implied bias, and evidence was sufficient to prove intent to distribute.
• United States v. Tyler
  505 F.2d 1329· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of hearsay testimony under the co-conspirator exception was improper due to insufficient independent evidence of a conspiracy, requiring reversal of the conviction.
• United States v. Castillo-Burgos
  501 F.2d 217· 9th Cir.· 1974-07-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a jury may infer knowledge of contraband from the fact that a defendant was driving and in sole control of a vehicle containing concealed contraband, but a district court cannot sua sponte order deportation.
• United States v. Juventino H. Martinez
  496 F.2d 664· 5th Cir.· 1974-06-26 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial judge's prejudicial remarks and erroneous instructions to the jury deprived the defendants of a fair trial.
• United States v. Jimenez
  496 F.2d 288· 5th Cir.· 1974-06-21 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the appellant's conviction for conspiracy and related offenses, and that the trial court did not err in admitting certain testimony or evidence.
• United States v. Johnston
  497 F.2d 397· 9th Cir.· 1974-05-01 ·cited 24×
  The court held that sniffing luggage and forcing open locked suitcases containing marijuana did not violate the Fourth Amendment under the circumstances presented.
• United States v. Super
  492 F.2d 319· 2d Cir.· 1974-02-25 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the government fulfilled its obligation by identifying the informant and stating his unavailability, and that evidence of a subsequent drug transaction was admissible to prove conspiracy.
• United States v. Barrera
  486 F.2d 333· 2d Cir.· 1973-10-09 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict all appellants of conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute heroin, and that various trial errors claimed were not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. Kiffer
  477 F.2d 349· 2d Cir.· 1973-04-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970, as applied to marijuana, is constitutional, and its classification of marijuana as a Schedule I controlled substance is not irrational or arbitrary.
• United States v. Shirley
  884 F.2d 1130· 9th Cir.· 1989-08-24 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting testimony, denying a motion to subpoena witnesses at government expense, admitting summary charts, denying a motion for acquittal, or denying a motion for continuance. The court affirmed the convicti
• United States v. Murray
  753 F.2d 612· 7th Cir.· 1985-01-29 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's convictions for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute and conspiracy to possess marijuana with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Ospina
  739 F.2d 448· 9th Cir.· 1984-08-02 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the challenged evidence was properly admitted.
• United States v. Nolan
  718 F.2d 589· 3d Cir.· 1983-09-30 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the seizure of evidence was lawful because exigent circumstances justified the unannounced entry, and that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the convictions.