Possession With Intent To Distribute

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

• United States v. Grandison
  783 F.2d 1152· 4th Cir.· 1986-02-21 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions to strike a juror, imposing consecutive sentences for possession of different controlled substances, admitting evidence of unexplained wealth, admitting a deceased witness's prior testimony, or denying a motion to
• Barnes v. United States
  777 F.2d 430· 8th Cir.· 1985-11-21 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding of intent to distribute and that any error in jury instructions was harmless or not plain error.
• United States v. Rhoda Ogberaha
  771 F.2d 655· 2d Cir.· 1985-08-26 ·cited 16×
  Body cavity searches conducted at the border are permissible under the Fourth Amendment if supported by reasonable suspicion that the individual is concealing contraband internally.
• United States v. Dekle
  768 F.2d 1257· 11th Cir.· 1985-08-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that there was no fatal variance between the indictment and evidence, joinder of defendants was proper, and various evidentiary rulings were either harmless error or not grounds for reversal.
• Timberlake v. United States
  767 F.2d 1479· 10th Cir.· 1985-07-23 ·cited 16×
  The court held that convictions under multiple conspiracy statutes did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause and that appellants received effective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Martinez
  764 F.2d 744· 10th Cir.· 1985-06-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the affidavit submitted to the magistrate, viewed under the totality of the circumstances, provided sufficient reliable facts to establish probable cause for the search warrant.
• United States v. Silbert Mills
  760 F.2d 1116· 11th Cir.· 1985-05-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court erred in refusing to allow the deposition of an unarrested co-defendant and that the defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel warranted a remand for further proceedings.
• United States v. Johnson
  734 F.2d 503· 10th Cir.· 1984-05-15 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the inventory search was lawful, evidence of past drug transactions was admissible, and the jury instruction on the lesser included offense was not required.
• United States v. Padilla
  729 F.2d 1367· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-16 ·cited 16×
• United States v. Christensen
  732 F.2d 20· 1st Cir.· 1984-04-12 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the four subsections of 21 U.S.C. § 955a define separate offenses, allowing for multiple convictions and consecutive sentencing, and that the defendant's right to counsel was not violated.
• United States v. Chaim Levy
  731 F.2d 997· 2d Cir.· 1984-01-31 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a search incident to a lawful arrest is permissible, even if the arrest warrant was not obtained despite ample opportunity. However, evidence of a prior, distinct drug transaction, even if related, must be analyzed under Federal Rules of Evidence 404(b) and 40
• United States v. Tabor
  722 F.2d 596· 10th Cir.· 1983-11-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the warrantless seizure of marijuana from a barn was justified by exigent circumstances and the plain view doctrine, and the seizure of marijuana from the house was lawful as contraband.
• United States v. Ruigomez
  702 F.2d 61· 5th Cir.· 1983-03-21 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a search conducted pursuant to voluntary consent is an exception to the warrant and probable cause requirements, and that a search incident to a lawful arrest is also permissible.
• United States v. Swayne
  700 F.2d 467· 8th Cir.· 1983-02-25 ·cited 16×
  The dissenting judge holds that the DEA agents lacked probable cause to arrest Swayne, making the seizure of evidence and his inculpatory statement inadmissible.
• United States v. Collis
  699 F.2d 832· 6th Cir.· 1983-02-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the initial encounter between the DEA agent and the defendant did not constitute a seizure under the Fourth Amendment because a reasonable person would have felt free to leave. The court reversed the suppression order.
• United States v. Colmenares-Hernandez
  659 F.2d 39· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction, the jury instructions were adequate, and the imposition of consecutive sentences did not violate double jeopardy.
• United States v. Ali Asghar Taheri
  648 F.2d 598· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-01 ·cited 16×
  The court held that evidence obtained from an initial unlawful search and subsequent arrest based on that evidence is inadmissible, even if consent to search was given after arrest.
• United States v. Hernandez
  646 F.2d 970· 5th Cir.· 1981-06-01 ·cited 16×
  The dissenting judge believes the suppressed evidence was improperly admitted because the prosecutor's cross-examination exceeded its permissible scope, forcing the defendant to testify about unrelated matters.
• United States v. Roldan Guillen-Linares
  643 F.2d 1054· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-27 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the decision, finding that the Coast Guard's boarding and subsequent discovery of marijuana did not violate the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Robinson
  635 F.2d 363· 5th Cir.· 1981-01-26 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the admission of an out-of-court statement under the hearsay exception Rule 804(b)(3) was proper, and evidence of events following the charged conspiracy was admissible.
• United States v. Alvarez
  626 F.2d 208· 1st Cir.· 1980-07-28 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the appellant's convictions for conspiracy, aiding and abetting, and possession of cocaine, but that the special parole term was improperly imposed.
• United States v. Deggendorf
  626 F.2d 47· 8th Cir.· 1980-07-01 ·cited 16×
  The court should have suppressed evidence obtained from Deggendorf's involuntary detention.
• United States v. Allen
  613 F.2d 1248· 3d Cir.· 1980-02-05 ·cited 16×
  The grant of a new trial in a § 2255 proceeding is a final, appealable order, and the evidence was sufficient to show the defendant conspired with at least one other person.
• United States v. Diezel
  608 F.2d 204· 5th Cir.· 1979-12-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that Customs officers had statutory authority to arrest and search in drug enforcement cases, and that a volunteered statement does not require a voluntariness hearing.
• United States v. Haro-Espinosa
  619 F.2d 789· 9th Cir.· 1979-11-21 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance motions, refusing a new trial based on alleged Brady violations, finding the evidence sufficient for conspiracy convictions, admitting expert testimony, refusing a specific jury instruction,
• United States v. Nepomuceno Moreno-Nunez
  595 F.2d 1186· 9th Cir.· 1979-05-01 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a co-defendant's argument that another defendant's counsel's comment on his silence constituted a comment on his failure to testify was not grounds for reversal.
• Davis v. Davis
  585 F.2d 1226· 4th Cir.· 1978-10-30 ·cited 16×
  Sentences within statutory limits for drug offenses are not cruel and unusual punishment unless there are extraordinary circumstances demonstrating gross disproportionality to the crime.
• United States v. Norbert William McLAUGHLIN
  578 F.2d 1180· 5th Cir.· 1978-08-28 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the defendant's automobile was constitutional and that there was sufficient evidence to support his conspiracy conviction.
• United States v. Adams
  569 F.2d 924· 5th Cir.· 1978-03-17 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the appellant's vehicle qualified as a border search, justifying the search without probable cause.
• United States v. Candido Natal Riquelmy and Felix Lopez
  572 F.2d 947· 2d Cir.· 1978-03-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that appellees Candido Riquelmy and Felix Lopez lacked standing to challenge the search of Eddie Riquelmy's person because they had no legitimate expectation of privacy in the searched item and were not charged with a possessory offense after the government agreed
• United States v. Tenorio
  565 F.2d 943· 5th Cir.· 1978-01-09 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the admission of hearsay evidence under the co-conspirator exception, even without strict adherence to Rule 104(a), was harmless error given the independent evidence supporting the conviction.
• United States v. Constantine
  567 F.2d 266· 4th Cir.· 1977-12-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the officer's stop of the defendant was justified by reasonable suspicion, making the seizure of evidence permissible.
• United States v. Montgomery
  554 F.2d 754· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-24 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant for conspiracy with McGarrity, and the search of the airplane was legal due to corroborated informant information and exigent circumstances.
• United States v. Shima
  545 F.2d 1026· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-24 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the warrantless entry and search of the apartment did not violate the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights because the officers had probable cause based on corroborating circumstances and the plain view observation of contraband.
• United States v. Martinez
  536 F.2d 1107· 5th Cir.· 1976-08-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that admitting statements from a withdrawn guilty plea for impeachment purposes was error, but harmless error given the overall evidence.
• United States v. Garcia
  526 F.2d 958· 5th Cir.· 1976-02-06 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the sentencing procedure for prior convictions under 21 U.S.C.A. § 851(b) was not substantially complied with, requiring vacation of the sentence.
• United States v. Busard
  524 F.2d 72· 5th Cir.· 1975-12-05 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous, the admission of evidence concerning a prior arrest was harmless error, and the seized cocaine was properly admitted.
• United States v. Nocar
  497 F.2d 719· 7th Cir.· 1974-05-31 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the defendants' prosecution was valid despite the timing of the controlled substance schedule republication, and that probable cause existed for the warrantless search of their automobile.
• United States v. Collier
  493 F.2d 327· 6th Cir.· 1974-03-27 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the affidavit supporting the search warrant was sufficient to establish probable cause and that the statute 21 U.S.C. § 848 was not unconstitutionally vague.
• United States v. Fannon
  491 F.2d 129· 5th Cir.· 1974-03-15 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the failure to disclose a co-defendant's plea bargain to the jury was harmless error, and no conflict of interest existed for the defense attorney.
• United States v. Greenbank
  491 F.2d 184· 9th Cir.· 1974-01-28 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the defendant's due process argument based on government infiltration was foreclosed by United States v. Russell, and that prosecutorial misconduct did not rise to the level of plain error, especially given the withdrawal of mistrial motions.
• United States v. Irion
  482 F.2d 1240· 9th Cir.· 1973-07-26 ·cited 16×
  The court held that consent to search a motel room can be voluntary even if the subject is unaware of their right to refuse, and that circumstantial evidence and statements can be sufficient to convict a passenger of drug importation and possession.
• United States v. Cannon
  472 F.2d 144· 9th Cir.· 1972-12-27 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of the defendant being armed or in refusing jury instructions, and that comments by co-defendant's counsel were not prejudicial.
• United States v. Encarnacion Solis, Jr.
  469 F.2d 1113· 5th Cir.· 1972-12-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the arrests of the appellants were based on probable cause, making the evidence discovered incident to those arrests admissible. The court also found the circumstantial evidence sufficient to support their convictions.
• United States v. Vasquez
  468 F.2d 565· 2d Cir.· 1972-10-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a conviction and sentence on separate counts for possession with intent to distribute and distribution of heroin, arising from a single transaction, can be affirmed under the concurrent sentence doctrine when concurrent sentences are imposed and no prejudice r
• United States v. Mateen Yusuf Shabazz
  993 F.2d 431· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-04 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the car was lawful based on consent, the refusal of a 'mere presence' jury instruction was not error, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Custis
  988 F.2d 1355· 4th Cir.· 1993-03-22 ·cited 15×
  The court held that newly discovered impeachment evidence, without more, does not warrant a new trial, and that challenges to the constitutional validity of prior convictions, other than Gideon violations, are generally not reviewable at a federal sentencing hearing.
• United States v. Lopez-Gil
  965 F.2d 1124· 1st Cir.· 1992-01-03 ·cited 15×
• United States v. Boissoneault
  926 F.2d 230· 2d Cir.· 1991-02-26 ·cited 15×
  The court held that even if expert testimony was admissible, the evidence was insufficient to prove intent to distribute cocaine beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Mazzanti
  925 F.2d 1026· 7th Cir.· 1991-02-19 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying a new trial based on newly discovered evidence of a witness's recantation, as the evidence, even if corrected, would not likely have led to a different verdict.