Possession With Intent To Distribute

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

• United States v. Brugman
  655 F.2d 540· 4th Cir.· 1981-05-15 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying severance motions, admitting evidence of similar acts with limiting instructions, or in allowing a co-defendant who pleaded guilty to testify, as no Sixth Amendment violation occurred.
• United States v. Moises Orozco Jimenez
  622 F.2d 753· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-28 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying motions for acquittal or in its jury instructions regarding withdrawal from a conspiracy, as the evidence presented created a question of fact for the jury.
• United States v. Tejeda
  974 F.2d 210· 1st Cir.· 1992-09-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Tejeda of conspiracy and that the district court did not err in admitting certain evidence or denying severance. Christian's claims regarding informant disclosure and entrapment were also rejected.
• United States v. McGUIRE
  957 F.2d 310· 7th Cir.· 1992-02-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the search of the defendant's car was lawful under the automobile exception and inventory search doctrines, and his confession was voluntary, thus affirming his conviction and sentence.
• United States v. Vasquez
  953 F.2d 176· 5th Cir.· 1992-01-23 ·cited 22×
  The court held that exigent circumstances justified the warrantless entry into the residence and that there was sufficient evidence to support the defendants' convictions for conspiracy and aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute marijuana.
• United States v. Tabares
  951 F.2d 405· 1st Cir.· 1991-11-14 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the convictions and Tabares' sentence, but remanded for resentencing Ramirez with a two-level reduction in his offense level.
• United States v. Moreno
  947 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1991-10-17 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the convictions but vacated Gonzalez's sentence, finding the obstruction of justice enhancement was not supported by evidence of significant impediment to the investigation.
• United States v. Lokey
  945 F.2d 825· 5th Cir.· 1991-10-10 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the evidence supported a single conspiracy and that the admission of evidence predating the indictment's timeframe was permissible.
• United States v. Marquez
  941 F.2d 60· 2d Cir.· 1991-06-24 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the twenty-year term of supervised release was improperly imposed and must be reconsidered in light of the Sentencing Guidelines, which mandate a term between three and five years. The court affirmed the remainder of the judgment.
• United States v. Sonnie Davis
  932 F.2d 752· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-17 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed convictions for heroin possession and witness tampering, finding no Fourth Amendment violations and sufficient evidence. It reversed the sentence for Kevin Davis, finding the district court erred in not applying the career offender guideline.
• United States v. Arboleda
  929 F.2d 858· 1st Cir.· 1991-04-08 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the admission of evidence, the handling of discovery violations, or the denial of witness access.
• United States v. Calixtro Torres-Rodriguez
  930 F.2d 1375· 9th Cir.· 1991-04-04 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by denying a motion for substitute counsel without inquiry, warranting reversal of the conviction. It also held that the denial of a continuance due to a superseding indictment prejudiced the defendant, requiring reversal
• United States v. Guerra-Marez
  928 F.2d 665· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that wiretap evidence was admissible, a variance between the indictment and evidence did not prejudice substantial rights, and prosecutorial explanations for jury strikes were adequate. However, the evidence was insufficient to support Wenseslada Reyes-Moya's consp
• United States v. Stuart
  923 F.2d 607· 8th Cir.· 1991-01-16 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that sufficient evidence supported the distribution charge, evidentiary rulings were not prejudicial, Brady/Jencks material was properly handled, and entrapment claims lacked merit.
• United States v. Charria
  919 F.2d 842· 2d Cir.· 1990-12-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that an indicted defendant's knowing and voluntary waiver of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel during post-indictment questioning and consent to search is constitutionally adequate if the defendant receives Miranda warnings, even if not explicitly informed of th
• United States v. Millard P. Chambers
  918 F.2d 1455· 9th Cir.· 1990-11-20 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of possession with intent to distribute, and that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions, nor was there ineffective assistance of counsel or an abuse of discretion in admitting photographs
• United States v. Iglesias
  915 F.2d 1524· 11th Cir.· 1990-10-31 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's convictions for conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute and possession with intent to distribute, and that any prejudice from the prosecutor's closing argument was cured by the court's inst
• United States v. Garcia
  909 F.2d 1346· 9th Cir.· 1990-07-31 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a defendant cannot withdraw a guilty plea based solely on counsel's erroneous sentencing prediction, and that sentence enhancement for a co-conspirator's weapon possession is appropriate if reasonably foreseeable.
• United States v. Edilberto Gonzalez-Basulto
  898 F.2d 1011· 5th Cir.· 1990-04-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant voluntarily consented to the search of his trailer and that the search did not exceed the scope of his consent, and that the district court did not err in denying a reduction for acceptance of responsibility.
• United States v. Juby Deon Battle and Donald Shannon Bullard
  892 F.2d 992· 11th Cir.· 1990-01-08 ·cited 22×
  The court should affirm the district court's judgment of acquittal because the government failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Erwin Pascacio Clotida
  892 F.2d 1098· 1st Cir.· 1989-12-20 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a defendant who fails to renew a motion for acquittal after presenting evidence waives the motion, but the conviction can still be reviewed for manifest injustice. The court also held that mere presence at the scene of a crime, without more, is insufficient to
• United States v. Mendoza
  876 F.2d 639· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-31 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed convictions and sentences, holding that Mendoza's sentence was not cruel and unusual punishment, the mandatory minimum penalties were constitutional, the evidence supported a single conspiracy, severance was not warranted, and any error in admitting other crime
• United States v. Chestang
  849 F.2d 528· 11th Cir.· 1988-07-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that coconspirator statements were properly admitted, the government's discovery violation was harmless, the admission of check endorsements was harmless error, and the district court's prejudicial remark was cured by a corrective instruction.
• United States v. Pupo
  841 F.2d 1235· 4th Cir.· 1988-03-10 ·cited 22×
  A conviction under an indictment that fails to allege an essential element of the offense, specifically scienter, is invalid if the objection is raised before verdict. Newly discovered evidence that is merely cumulative does not warrant a new trial.
• United States v. Pietro Tussa
  816 F.2d 58· 2d Cir.· 1987-04-06 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the admission of hearsay testimony from a confidential informant was prejudicial error for Patiwana and Zummo, requiring reversal, but harmless error for Amato and Tussa. The court also found sufficient evidence and probable cause for Amato and Tussa's convict
• United States v. Crockett
  813 F.2d 1310· 4th Cir.· 1987-03-19 ·cited 22×
  The dissenting judge holds that Thressa Crews was improperly prohibited from cross-examining her co-defendant, Henry Crockett, violating her Sixth Amendment confrontation clause rights.
• United States v. Nordling
  804 F.2d 1466· 9th Cir.· 1986-11-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant abandoned his tote bag, making its warrantless search permissible, but suppressed statements made after he unequivocally requested an attorney from NTF agents.
• United States v. Hanson
  801 F.2d 757· 5th Cir.· 1986-10-07 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the initial police-citizen contact constituted an investigatory stop, not an arrest, and was supported by reasonable suspicion, making the subsequent consent to search valid.
• United States v. Tedder
  801 F.2d 1437· 4th Cir.· 1986-09-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the attorney-client privilege did not apply to communications made to a colleague who was not acting as a legal advisor and where confidentiality was not reasonably expected. It also found sufficient evidence for conspiracy and fraud convictions and that multi
• United States v. Garcia
  781 F.2d 422· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the stop and search of the defendant's truck were lawful, and his suppression hearing testimony was admissible at trial due to a stipulation. The court also vacated the special parole term as unauthorized by statute.
• United States v. Gant
  759 F.2d 484· 5th Cir.· 1985-05-06 ·cited 22×
  The court held that law enforcement officers acted in objective good faith reliance on a warrant, even if probable cause was lacking, and thus the evidence should not have been suppressed.
• United States v. Strawser
  739 F.2d 1226· 7th Cir.· 1984-07-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to quash the second indictment, as the government made no express or implied promises in the first plea agreement that would preclude prosecution for the offenses charged in the second indictment
• United States v. Reed
  733 F.2d 492· 8th Cir.· 1984-04-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the initial warrantless entry onto the C.D.Y. premises was justified by probable cause and exigent circumstances, and that the subsequent searches and seizures were lawful.
• United States v. Cannington
  729 F.2d 702· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the trial court did not err in its rulings on joinder, severance, co-conspirator statements, identification, discovery, prosecutorial comment, or sentencing.
• United States v. Agha Kaleem Ullah Khan
  728 F.2d 676· 5th Cir.· 1984-03-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion for a continuance to secure a codefendant's testimony, as the defendant failed to show the codefendant would testify and the Fifth Amendment privilege could still be invoked.
• United States v. Blessing
  727 F.2d 353· 5th Cir.· 1984-03-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Blessing's conspiracy conviction but sufficient to support Rodriguez's conviction.
• United States v. Luce
  713 F.2d 1236· 6th Cir.· 1983-08-09 ·cited 22×
  A preliminary ruling on the admissibility of a prior conviction for impeachment purposes is not reviewable on appeal if the defendant does not testify at trial.
• United States v. Levino Michelena-Orovio
  702 F.2d 496· 5th Cir.· 1983-03-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the importation of a large quantity of marijuana, coupled with other circumstances, is sufficient to infer a defendant's knowing participation in a conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Moya
  704 F.2d 337· 7th Cir.· 1983-03-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the temporary detention of the defendant's travel bag was constitutionally permissible based on reasonable suspicion that it contained contraband, and that the initial encounter with law enforcement did not constitute a seizure.
• United States v. Muench
  694 F.2d 28· 2d Cir.· 1982-11-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that possession of controlled substances within U.S. territory with intent to distribute is a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), regardless of whether the intent is to distribute within or outside the U.S., and regardless of whether the defendant passes through U.
• United States v. Chase
  692 F.2d 69· 9th Cir.· 1982-09-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant lacked standing to challenge the legality of a third party's detention, and that exigent circumstances justified securing his residence.
• United States v. Watson
  678 F.2d 765· 9th Cir.· 1982-06-02 ·cited 22×
  Routine Coast Guard vessel safety and documentation inspections conducted pursuant to an administrative plan, even after dark and without specific suspicion, are reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Booth
  673 F.2d 27· 1st Cir.· 1982-03-19 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court correctly denied appellants' motions to dismiss the conspiracy count of the indictment on the ground of double jeopardy, as the two conspiracies were not the same offense.
• United States v. Mack
  643 F.2d 1119· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that evidence of a subsequent drug sale was admissible to rebut an entrapment defense, and prosecutorial remarks, while inappropriate, were harmless error.
• United States v. Fontanez
  628 F.2d 687· 1st Cir.· 1980-08-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the admission of coconspirator hearsay statements was not erroneous, and the conviction on Count I is affirmed, but the case is remanded for resentencing on Count II due to a statutory sentencing limit violation.
• United States v. Rosado-Fernandez
  614 F.2d 50· 5th Cir.· 1980-03-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the conspiracy conviction and that a co-conspirator's possession of drugs could be imputed to the defendant. The court also held that the evidence sufficiently established the cocaine was the illegal 'L' isomer.
• United States v. Brunilda Garcia
  605 F.2d 349· 7th Cir.· 1979-08-31 ·cited 22×
  A warrantless search of hand-carried luggage seized incident to a lawful custodial arrest is permissible under the Fourth Amendment if it is contemporaneous with the arrest and confined to the person and immediate vicinity of the arrestee.
• Gov't OF the Canal Zone v. Davis
  592 F.2d 887· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-06 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court's denial of the appellants' motion to inspect jury records was reversible error, violating their rights under the Jury Selection and Service Act of 1968.
• United States v. Bloomfield
  594 F.2d 1200· 8th Cir.· 1979-03-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that opening a securely closed knapsack during an inventory search exceeded the permissible scope of such a search.
• United States v. Lane
  584 F.2d 60· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to sever the trials of the two defendants after one defendant was acquitted of the conspiracy charge, leading to prejudice for both defendants.