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. Serafin Alfonso
  759 F.2d 728· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-01 ·cited 77×
  The court held that the search of the vessel was a valid extended border search, and the admission of prior acts evidence against Alfonso was an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Moya
  721 F.2d 606· 7th Cir.· 1983-11-18 ·cited 77×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the 'reasonable doubt' test, not the 'hypothesis of innocence' test, is the proper standard for reviewing the sufficiency of evidence in criminal cases.
• United States v. Robinson
  625 F.2d 1211· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-17 ·cited 77×
  The court held that the magistrate erred in finding that voluntary consent automatically purged the taint of an illegal seizure, and that the issue of taint requires further factual findings. The court affirmed the finding of voluntary consent to accompany officers and to the sea
• United States v. Rojas
  537 F.2d 216· 5th Cir.· 1976-08-20 ·cited 77×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its voir dire, jury instructions on possession, sufficiency of evidence, or refusal to declare a mistrial.
• United States v. Buddy Joe Barnard
  490 F.2d 907· 9th Cir.· 1973-12-10 ·cited 77×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that venue was proper in the Southern District of California for all counts, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evidentiary rulings regarding witness competency, credibility, and discovery.
• United States v. Gianni
  678 F.2d 956· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-14 ·cited 76×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendants of conspiracy to possess marijuana with intent to distribute, and that the government's conduct did not constitute outrageousness denying due process.
• United States v. Jonas
  639 F.2d 200· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-09 ·cited 76×
  The court held that the Coast Guard's boarding of the vessel under 14 U.S.C. § 89(a) was lawful, and the appellant's statements made before Miranda warnings were not the product of custodial interrogation.
• United States v. Myron Lieberman
  637 F.2d 95· 2d Cir.· 1980-12-16 ·cited 76×
  The court held that a hotel registration card was admissible as non-hearsay and that a coconspirator's statements were admissible as declarations against penal interest, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.
• United States v. Aleman
  592 F.2d 881· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-06 ·cited 76×
  The court affirmed the convictions of both defendants, finding sufficient evidence for conspiracy and possession, and that the admission of extrinsic evidence and prosecutorial comments did not constitute reversible error.
• United States v. Vicente Meneses-Davila
  580 F.2d 888· 5th Cir.· 1978-09-25 ·cited 76×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the prosecutor's repeated comments on the defendant's post-arrest silence, used to impeach his trial testimony, constituted reversible error because the error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Rollins
  862 F.2d 1282· 7th Cir.· 1988-11-21 ·cited 75×
  The court affirmed both defendants' convictions but remanded Slaughter's case for reconsideration of his sentence.
• United States v. Smith
  840 F.2d 886· 11th Cir.· 1988-03-25 ·cited 75×
  The court held that the defendant was not entitled to an entrapment instruction, the statutory definition of 'mixture' was not vague, but the sentence regarding post-confinement monitoring was improperly imposed due to timing of statutory amendments.
• United States v. Espinosa
  827 F.2d 604· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-09 ·cited 75×
  The court held that the initial detention and subsequent arrest were based on reasonable suspicion and not a pretext for a search, and that the search warrant was sufficiently particular and supported by probable cause. Expert testimony was properly admitted.
• United States v. REY
  811 F.2d 1453· 11th Cir.· 1987-03-09 ·cited 75×
  The court held that the government's use of contingently motivated informants did not violate due process, and the modified Allen charge, while concerning, was permissible under binding precedent.
• United States v. Erwin
  793 F.2d 656· 5th Cir.· 1986-07-03 ·cited 75×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the theory of multiple conspiracies, as the evidence supported such a theory for Don Erwin and a separate cocaine conspiracy. The court also found that Grace Davis suffered compelling prejudice from a j
• United States v. Obregon
  748 F.2d 1371· 10th Cir.· 1984-11-13 ·cited 75×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the defendant lacked standing to challenge the search of the rental car, the detention was lawful, consent to search was voluntary, and statements made after invoking counsel were admissible because the defendant initiated further communication.
• United States v. James ("Jake") Rohrer
  708 F.2d 429· 9th Cir.· 1983-05-25 ·cited 75×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the defendants' convictions for drug offenses were supported by sufficient evidence and that no reversible errors occurred during the trial.
• United States v. Valentine
  706 F.2d 282· 10th Cir.· 1983-04-20 ·cited 75×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination or denying severance motions, but that multiple convictions for simultaneous possession and receipt of firearms were improper.
• United States v. Brewer
  630 F.2d 795· 10th Cir.· 1980-09-26 ·cited 75×
  The court held that no fatal variance occurred, co-conspirator testimony was properly admitted, physical evidence was admissible, and other contentions lacked merit.
• United States v. Soto
  591 F.2d 1091· 5th Cir.· 1979-03-22 ·cited 75×
  The court held that while evidence was sufficient for possession convictions, it was insufficient for importation convictions for some appellants and all convictions for two others. Motions to suppress were properly denied, and marijuana samples were admissible.
• United States v. Smith
  918 F.2d 1501· 11th Cir.· 1990-12-14 ·cited 74×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court affirmed most convictions but vacated sentences for multiple firearm offenses for Hicks and A.J. Smith, remanding for resentencing.
• United States v. Zambrana
  841 F.2d 1320· 7th Cir.· 1988-03-07 ·cited 74×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance and that the wiretap affidavits sufficiently demonstrated the necessity of electronic surveillance.
• United States v. Drake Williams
  809 F.2d 1072· 5th Cir.· 1987-01-29 ·cited 74×
  The court affirmed most convictions but reversed some for specific defendants, finding that plea agreements did not preclude further indictment and that informal use immunity granted to Grossman was binding.
• United States v. Rush
  738 F.2d 497· 1st Cir.· 1984-06-27 ·cited 74×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the Speedy Trial Act was not violated due to various excludable delays, including those from pretrial motions, joint trials with codefendants, and 'ends of justice' continuances.
• United States v. Orson G. White
  648 F.2d 29· D.C. Cir.· 1981-02-06 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the police conduct, involving drawing guns and ordering occupants out of a vehicle without probable cause or reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, constituted an arrest rather than a permissible investigatory stop.
• United States v. Manley
  632 F.2d 978· 2d Cir.· 1980-09-15 ·cited 74×·via Possession Of Narcotics With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the agents had sufficient justification to execute an arrest warrant in the appellants' home and that the subsequent search was lawful. The court also affirmed the district court's refusal to disclose the identities of informants.
• United States v. Baker
  609 F.2d 134· 5th Cir.· 1980-01-02 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the possession of marijuana with intent to distribute statute applies extraterritorially to conduct occurring within the customs waters of the United States, even if no act occurred within the territorial limits of the United States, provided there was an inte
• United States v. Mendoza
  574 F.2d 1373· 5th Cir.· 1978-06-16 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the marital privilege barring one spouse from testifying adversely to another is inapplicable when the testifying spouse did not testify at trial, but this error was harmless.
• United States v. Luttetus Perry
  550 F.2d 524· 9th Cir.· 1977-03-22 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in handling jury voir dire, admitting rebuttal testimony, or limiting cross-examination, and that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for a single conspiracy.
• United States v. Stanley
  545 F.2d 661· 9th Cir.· 1976-11-05 ·cited 74×
• United States v. Menichino
  497 F.2d 935· 5th Cir.· 1974-07-29 ·cited 74×
  Incriminating statements volunteered by a defendant during booking, after being advised of Miranda rights and requesting an attorney, are admissible if not made in response to interrogation about criminal activity. The admission of a co-conspirator's hearsay statement is permissi
• United States v. Bugarin-Casas
  484 F.2d 853· 9th Cir.· 1973-08-15 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the Border Patrol agents had sufficient 'founded suspicion' to stop the vehicle, and the subsequent discovery of marijuana in plain view provided probable cause for the search.
• United States v. Rivera
  944 F.2d 1563· 11th Cir.· 1991-10-22 ·cited 73×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the convictions of Elena Vila and Johnny Rivera for drug offenses. The court held that while the government committed a discovery violation by disclosing Rivera's statement about suitcase ownership late, it did not prejudice his substantial rights. T
• United States v. Espinosa
  782 F.2d 888· 10th Cir.· 1986-01-24 ·cited 73×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that the defendant's detention at the border patrol checkpoint was lawful, his consent to search was voluntary, and the search did not exceed the scope of his consent.
• United States v. Douglass
  780 F.2d 1472· 9th Cir.· 1986-01-21 ·cited 73×
  The court held that the jury instructions regarding the firearms charge were proper, the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, and the denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Watson
  669 F.2d 1374· 11th Cir.· 1982-03-08 ·cited 73×
  The court held that the exclusion of defense witnesses offering opinion testimony regarding the government's key witness's credibility was prejudicial error requiring reversal, as it violated the defendants' Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process and was not harmless beyond
• United States v. Diaz
  655 F.2d 580· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-08 ·cited 73×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the appellant's convictions for conspiracy, possession, and distribution of cocaine, and that the district court did not err in denying the request to disclose the confidential informant's identity.
• United States v. Kern
  657 F.2d 985· 8th Cir.· 1981-08-12 ·cited 73×
  The court affirmed the convictions of Burchinal, Kern, and Gerard for conspiracy and Travel Act violations, but remanded for reduction of costs assessed against Kern.
• United States v. Clark
  559 F.2d 420· 5th Cir.· 1977-09-19 ·cited 73×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the officers had probable cause to stop and search the truck based on the totality of the circumstances, and that the subsequent search of the station wagon was permissible under the automobile exception to the warrant requirement.
• United States v. Missick
  875 F.2d 1294· 7th Cir.· 1989-05-24 ·cited 72×
  The court affirmed the defendant's conviction but remanded for resentencing, finding the district court improperly departed from the Sentencing Guidelines based on co-conspirators' weapon possession.
• United States v. Espinoza-Seanez
  862 F.2d 526· 5th Cir.· 1988-12-15 ·cited 72×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that a rational jury could find sufficient evidence to establish the required intent for conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Bennett
  848 F.2d 1134· 11th Cir.· 1988-07-07 ·cited 72×
  The court held that the admission of William Bennett's prior drug smuggling convictions was proper under Rule 404(b) and Rule 403, and that the use of a single interpreter for multiple Spanish-speaking defendants did not violate their statutory or constitutional rights. The court
• United States v. Wood
  834 F.2d 1382· 8th Cir.· 1987-11-25 ·cited 72×
  The majority opinion, which the dissent disagrees with, affirmed the sentence enhancement on Count I, while the dissent argues that the jury's not guilty verdict on Count III, combined with the jury instructions, means no finding was made as to the amount of cocaine, thus preclud
• United States v. Stanford Champion
  813 F.2d 1154· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-06 ·cited 72×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of a single conspiracy, and that the appellants were not prejudiced by any variance between the indictment and the proof.
• United States v. Williams
  798 F.2d 1024· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-15 ·cited 72×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Methamphetamine
  The court reversed Debbie Williams' conspiracy conviction due to insufficient evidence but affirmed convictions for David Williams and Wayne Russell.
• United States v. Warner
  690 F.2d 545· 6th Cir.· 1982-09-13 ·cited 72×
  The court held that a fatal variance existed between the indictment charging a single conspiracy and the proof showing multiple conspiracies, requiring reversal of the conspiracy conviction. The court also found that the prejudicial spillover from the conspiracy evidence required
• United States v. REY
  641 F.2d 222· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-30 ·cited 72×
  The court held that claims of governmental misconduct and insufficiency of evidence are not properly reviewable on interlocutory appeal from a denial of a motion to dismiss on double jeopardy grounds, but an acquittal on related counts can raise a double jeopardy issue.
• United States v. Dien
  609 F.2d 1038· 2d Cir.· 1979-10-26 ·cited 72×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the warrantless search of cartons found in a vehicle, even with probable cause, violates the Fourth Amendment under Arkansas v. Sanders, and that warrantless security searches of premises require exigent circumstances, which were absent here. However, the init
• United States v. Opager
  589 F.2d 799· 5th Cir.· 1979-02-14 ·cited 72×
  The court held that the erroneous exclusion of business records and the government's failure to disclose an informant's whereabouts constituted reversible error.
• United States v. Johnson
  588 F.2d 147· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-17 ·cited 72×
  A warrantless search of luggage is invalid if the exigency could have been eliminated by seizure and immobilization, requiring a warrant for the search.