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. Manzella
  791 F.2d 1263· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-20 ·cited 93×
  A defendant cannot be convicted of possession of drugs based on constructive possession without evidence of ultimate control over the drugs, and a flawed jury instruction on co-conspirator liability under Pinkerton v. United States can lead to reversal.
• United States v. Williford
  764 F.2d 1493· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-12 ·cited 93×
  The court held that evidence of a cocaine negotiation was admissible as inextricably intertwined with the charged marijuana conspiracy, and that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction for conspiracy to import marijuana.
• United States v. Lippner
  676 F.2d 456· 11th Cir.· 1982-04-29 ·cited 93×
  The court held that a prior conviction pending appeal is not considered 'final' for the purpose of imposing enhanced sentences under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(B).
• United States v. Dennis
  786 F.2d 1029· 11th Cir.· 1986-04-14 ·cited 92×
  The court held that the wiretap application was sufficient and that the trial court did not err in sentencing despite the lack of a special verdict, as the evidence overwhelmingly supported a heroin and cocaine conspiracy conviction.
• United States v. Foster
  711 F.2d 871· 9th Cir.· 1983-07-26 ·cited 92×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence for conspiracy and substantive counts, valid search warrants, and proper admission of evidence, with any errors deemed harmless.
• United States v. Valenzuela
  596 F.2d 824· 9th Cir.· 1979-03-23 ·cited 92×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy and possession against Manuel Valenzuela, Corley, and Alonso Lizarraga, but reversed Bernardina Lizarraga's convictions due to insufficient evidence.
• United States v. Augustus Charles Bobo
  586 F.2d 355· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-30 ·cited 92×·via Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute
  A defendant's consent to a mistrial, given through counsel, bars a subsequent double jeopardy claim, even if the mistrial was declared due to defense counsel's error and the defendant did not personally waive the right on the record.
• United States v. Flickinger
  573 F.2d 1349· 9th Cir.· 1978-03-24 ·cited 92×
  The court held that the warrantless arrest and search of Flickinger's home were justified by exigent circumstances, and the admission of voice identification testimony was proper.
• United States v. Perez
  526 F.2d 859· 5th Cir.· 1976-02-09 ·cited 92×·via Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that probable cause existed for warrantless arrests and searches, and that sufficiency of evidence challenges were waived or supported by substantial evidence. Minor witnesses were competent.
• United States v. Clemons
  503 F.2d 486· 8th Cir.· 1974-10-03 ·cited 92×·via Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that admitting evidence of the defendant's prior arrest in California for drug possession was prejudicial error because it was not proven by clear and convincing evidence and its probative value was outweighed by its prejudicial impact.
• United States v. Oliva
  497 F.2d 130· 5th Cir.· 1974-07-17 ·cited 92×
  The court held that the trial court erred in admitting hearsay testimony that was crucial to the prosecution's case, leading to the reversal of the convictions.
• United States v. Noah
  475 F.2d 688· 9th Cir.· 1973-03-02 ·cited 92×·via Possession Of Narcotics With Intent To Distribute
  The court affirmed convictions for drug trafficking and conspiracy, but vacated one conspiracy conviction for two appellants and struck one fine for another, finding no reversible error in the remaining convictions or sentences.
• United States v. Acosta-Cazares
  878 F.2d 945· 6th Cir.· 1989-07-07 ·cited 91×
  The court affirmed the jury convictions, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting prior bad acts evidence, properly denied the motion for acquittal on the firearm charge, and correctly applied the sentencing guidelines for obstruction of justice.
• United States v. Rivera-Santiago
  872 F.2d 1073· 1st Cir.· 1989-03-30 ·cited 91×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendants of conspiracy to possess and distribute marihuana, and affirmed the convictions. The court also found that the trial court's refusal to give a specific cautionary instruction was not reversible error.
• United States v. Yonn
  702 F.2d 1341· 11th Cir.· 1983-04-22 ·cited 91×
  The court held that the government's warrantless interception of conversations in a hotel room, without prior judicial authorization or consent from the occupant, violated the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Weinrich
  586 F.2d 481· 5th Cir.· 1978-12-15 ·cited 91×·via Possession Of Hashish With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the wiretap application was supported by sufficient probable cause and the information was not stale, and that the searches of the vessels were lawful due to probable cause and exigent circumstances.
• United States v. McNEESE
  901 F.2d 585· 7th Cir.· 1990-05-02 ·cited 90×
  The court held that the magistrate had a substantial basis for finding probable cause to issue the search warrants, and that the defendants failed to demonstrate material omissions from the affidavit under the Franks test.
• United States v. Blanco
  888 F.2d 907· 1st Cir.· 1989-11-07 ·cited 90×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  A sentencing court may consider drug quantities not covered by counts of conviction if they were part of the same course of conduct or common scheme or plan as the offense of conviction, and a defendant's entitlement to a reduction for acceptance of responsibility is not automati
• United States v. Severo D. Espinosa
  771 F.2d 1382· 10th Cir.· 1985-08-26 ·cited 90×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the convictions for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute, and that the trial court did not err in denying severance or mistrial based on co-defendant's opening statement.
• United States v. Buenaventura Martinez
  763 F.2d 1297· 11th Cir.· 1985-06-24 ·cited 90×
  The court held that it has jurisdiction over the government's appeal from a judgment of acquittal entered after a new trial was granted, and that the district court erred in granting the motion for a new trial.
• United States v. Meacham
  626 F.2d 503· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-26 ·cited 90×
  The court held that the statutes under which the defendants were convicted do not criminalize conspiracy to attempt an offense, and therefore the indictments failed to charge an offense. The court also held that the refusal to allow a defendant to cross-examine a government witne
• United States v. Whitmire
  595 F.2d 1303· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-04 ·cited 90×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the boarding and subsequent search of the vessel did not violate the defendant's Fourth Amendment rights, based on reasonable suspicion of a customs violation.
• United States v. Coronado
  554 F.2d 166· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-16 ·cited 90×
  The court held that the transcript showed compliance with Rule 11 as it read at the time of the plea hearing, and that the defendant understood the conspiracy charge.
• United States v. Oropeza
  564 F.2d 316· 9th Cir.· 1977-11-08 ·cited 89×
  The court held that possession with intent to distribute and distribution of heroin are lesser included offenses when the evidence of possession is solely derived from the distribution act, thus precluding consecutive sentences. However, the court affirmed convictions for conspir
• United States v. Batista-Polanco
  927 F.2d 14· 1st Cir.· 1991-02-28 ·cited 88×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding sufficient evidence for possession and conspiracy, that the informant's identity need not be disclosed, that the challenged statement was harmless error, and that sentencing enhancements were proper.
• United States v. Aguilar-Pena
  887 F.2d 347· 1st Cir.· 1989-10-12 ·cited 88×
  A district court cannot depart from sentencing guidelines based on general community sentiment or the incidence of crime in a particular locality, as these factors are considered by the Sentencing Commission and departures must be based on circumstances specific to the offender a
• United States v. Evelio Pinto
  875 F.2d 143· 7th Cir.· 1989-05-19 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the Sentencing Guidelines, including the career offender provision, are constitutional and properly applied, and that residential burglary qualifies as a crime of violence.
• United States v. Zapata
  871 F.2d 616· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-24 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting evidence of a prior drug transaction, refusing to strike testimony after a witness invoked the Fifth Amendment, or admitting hotel registration records. Any error in the jury instruction regarding pr
• United States v. Evans
  697 F.2d 240· 8th Cir.· 1983-01-06 ·cited 88×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant of conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute marijuana, and that the admission of prior wrongful acts testimony was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Massey
  687 F.2d 1348· 10th Cir.· 1982-08-27 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the use of a defendant's post-arrest silence to impeach an exculpatory story may violate due process if Miranda warnings were given, and remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine if warnings were provided.
• United States v. Elam
  678 F.2d 1234· 5th Cir.· 1982-06-21 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the evidence presented was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find a single conspiracy, not multiple independent ones, and that the convictions should be affirmed.
• United States v. Venerando German Serrano
  607 F.2d 1145· 5th Cir.· 1979-12-07 ·cited 88×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the defendants' convictions were affirmed because the Customs officers had reasonable suspicion to board the vessel, the trial judge properly denied the recusal motion, and the prosecutor's comments on the defendants' silence were permissible.
• United States v. Gordon
  895 F.2d 932· 4th Cir.· 1990-02-02 ·cited 87×
  The court affirmed the conviction but reversed and remanded the sentence, finding the district court erred in granting a two-level reduction for minor participant status without sufficient factual basis.
• United States v. Harrell
  737 F.2d 971· 11th Cir.· 1984-07-30 ·cited 87×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Hawkins' conviction on the Travel Act charge (Count Three), reversing that conviction, but affirmed all other convictions and rulings.
• United States v. Deral Gene Holman
  680 F.2d 1340· 11th Cir.· 1982-07-22 ·cited 87×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in conducting the voir dire, admitting evidence of prior similar acts, or limiting cross-examination, as the procedures followed and evidence admitted were permissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence and relevan
• United States v. Danilo Bautista Batimana and Jose Edgardo Noguera
  623 F.2d 1366· 9th Cir.· 1980-07-22 ·cited 87×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to establish possession for Nicanor, and therefore insufficient to support the convictions of his alleged aiders and abettors.
• United States v. Worthington
  544 F.2d 1275· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-10 ·cited 87×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the warrantless arrest and search were lawful because probable cause existed based on corroborated informer's tip and plain view observation of contraband, and the district court did not err in denying an in camera interview with the informer.
• United States v. Bustamante-Gamez
  488 F.2d 4· 9th Cir.· 1973-10-24 ·cited 87×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the officers had probable cause to believe the car was in the garage and that exigent circumstances justified warrantless entry into the garage for arrest, and that the entry complied with 18 U.S.C. § 3109.
• United States v. McLAIN
  823 F.2d 1457· 11th Cir.· 1987-08-07 ·cited 86×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the cumulative effect of judicial errors and prosecutorial misconduct, along with a conflict of interest affecting one defendant's counsel, deprived the appellants of a fair trial.
• United States v. Robinson
  690 F.2d 869· 11th Cir.· 1982-11-01 ·cited 86×
  The court held that the defendant's consent to accompany the agent to an office was not voluntary, rendering his subsequent arrest illegal and the discovered cocaine inadmissible as fruit of the poisonous tree.
• United States v. Clark N. Fischel
  686 F.2d 1082· 5th Cir.· 1982-09-10 ·cited 86×
  The court held that the defendant failed to present sufficient evidence of government inducement to warrant an entrapment jury instruction and that the jury charge on aiding and abetting was adequate. The court also found that the denial of access to the informant's address, whil
• United States v. Rochan
  563 F.2d 1246· 5th Cir.· 1977-12-01 ·cited 86×
  Statements by the prosecutor and trial judge did not constitute an improper comment on the defendants' failure to testify, and authenticated transcripts of consensual tape recordings are admissible with participant testimony as to accuracy.
• United States v. Inmon
  568 F.2d 326· 3d Cir.· 1977-11-28 ·cited 86×·via Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute
  Denial of a motion to dismiss an indictment on double jeopardy grounds is an appealable final decision, and the government bears the burden of proving separate offenses by a preponderance of the evidence once the defendant makes a non-frivolous showing.
• United States v. Bloom
  538 F.2d 704· 5th Cir.· 1976-09-13 ·cited 86×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of other drug dealings, refusing an evidentiary hearing on wiretapping, or denying dismissal for speedy trial violations.
• United States v. Justo Fernan Martinez
  486 F.2d 15· 5th Cir.· 1973-10-12 ·cited 86×
  The court held that the trial judge erred in refusing to accept Martinez' guilty plea and in denying Huila's severance motion, while finding insufficient evidence to convict Padilla-Soris of conspiracy.
• United States v. Stratton
  779 F.2d 820· 2d Cir.· 1985-12-13 ·cited 85×
  The court held that a criminal conviction by an eleven-person jury is valid under Rule 23(b) when a juror is excused during deliberations, and that various evidentiary rulings and jury instructions were proper.
• United States v. Foote
  898 F.2d 659· 8th Cir.· 1990-03-15 ·cited 84×
  The court held that sufficient evidence supported the convictions, pretrial detention challenges were untimely, discovery rulings were within the district court's discretion, and sentencing guidelines were validly applied.
• United States v. Basey
  816 F.2d 980· 5th Cir.· 1987-04-28 ·cited 84×
  The court held that the investigatory stop and subsequent arrest of Basey were lawful, and the search of his vehicle incident to that arrest was also lawful. However, the evidence was insufficient to prove Ponce's participation in the charged conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Martino
  759 F.2d 998· 2d Cir.· 1985-04-03 ·cited 84×·via Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction and that the admission of a prior conviction was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Viserto
  596 F.2d 531· 2d Cir.· 1979-03-21 ·cited 84×
  The court affirmed convictions, finding all appellate arguments to be without merit, including challenges to evidence admissibility, discovery rules, indictment duplicity, and jury instructions.