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. Check
  582 F.2d 668· 2d Cir.· 1978-07-17 ·cited 72×·via Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the district court erred by admitting significant portions of the undercover officer's testimony, which constituted inadmissible hearsay, and that this error was prejudicial, requiring reversal.
• United States v. Daniels
  572 F.2d 535· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-05 ·cited 72×·via Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that admitting evidence of a defendant's unrelated, post-crime act to prove predisposition for entrapment is improper and requires reversal.
• United States v. Johnson
  513 F.2d 819· 2d Cir.· 1975-04-01 ·cited 72×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Methamphetamine
  The court held that the cumulative weight of the evidence, including Johnson's presence in the car, his association with Loewe, and his false statements, was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Johnson was guilty of conspiracy or aiding and abetting the importati
• United States v. Mieres-Borges
  919 F.2d 652· 11th Cir.· 1990-12-18 ·cited 71×
  The evidence was insufficient to convict Mieres-Borges beyond a reasonable doubt of possession with intent to distribute and conspiracy.
• United States v. Smith
  918 F.2d 1551· 11th Cir.· 1990-12-14 ·cited 71×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no abuse of discretion in venue decisions, entrapment defenses, severance denials, or prosecutorial remarks.
• United States v. Corbin
  734 F.2d 643· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-18 ·cited 71×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that their procedural objections lacked merit.
• United States v. Jenkins
  701 F.2d 850· 10th Cir.· 1983-02-28 ·cited 71×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court held that pre-indictment delay did not violate due process, post-indictment delay did not violate the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial, the jury instructions adequately covered the defendant's theory of defense, and the peremptory challenge of a Black juror was n
• United States v. Costa
  691 F.2d 1358· 11th Cir.· 1982-11-22 ·cited 71×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute is affirmed, finding no reversible error in the evidentiary rulings or the ineffective assistance of counsel claim.
• United States v. Glasgow
  658 F.2d 1036· 5th Cir.· 1981-10-13 ·cited 71×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support the conspiracy and marijuana possession convictions for both appellants, but affirmed Glasgow's cocaine possession conviction.
• United States v. Bronstein
  521 F.2d 459· 2d Cir.· 1975-08-08 ·cited 71×·via Possession Of Marijuana With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the use of a marijuana-sniffing dog to search a private bag constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment, but that the reduced expectation of privacy in checked baggage, combined with reasonable suspicion, can justify such a warrantless search.
• United States v. Hernandez
  896 F.2d 513· 11th Cir.· 1990-03-14 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to convict Giral of conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute, but sufficient for Bauta and Hernandez. The admission of prior convictions under Rule 404(b) was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Morales
  868 F.2d 1562· 11th Cir.· 1989-04-06 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the initial joinder of defendants in the indictment was proper under Rule 8(b) and that the denial of severance motions under Rule 14 was not an abuse of discretion, as no compelling prejudice was demonstrated.
• United States v. Robinson
  857 F.2d 1006· 5th Cir.· 1988-10-04 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support all four convictions and that the denial of the motion to suppress was not erroneous.
• United States v. Wallace
  848 F.2d 1464· 9th Cir.· 1988-05-26 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the district court erred in admitting Wallace's prior heroin conviction for impeachment and that the government's concession regarding Jencks Act notes required remand.
• United States v. Baldacchino
  762 F.2d 170· 1st Cir.· 1985-05-20 ·cited 70×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision, holding that the defendant's arrest was lawful due to probable cause and exigent circumstances, and that his subsequent statements were voluntary and admissible.
• United States v. Wilkinson
  754 F.2d 1427· 2d Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 70×
  The court affirmed convictions for drug offenses, finding sufficient evidence for continuing criminal enterprise, admissible prior consistent statements, and proper denial of multiple conspiracy charges and wiretap necessity.
• United States v. Butler
  611 F.2d 1066· 5th Cir.· 1980-02-14 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the jury selection process was constitutional, the warrantless arrests and seizures were lawful, the denial of severance was proper, and the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions for conspiracy to possess marijuana and aiding and abetting possessi
• United States v. Thompson
  603 F.2d 1200· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-05 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the statutes and regulations regarding currency transaction reporting were not unconstitutionally vague as applied and that structuring a transaction to avoid reporting requirements was unlawful.
• United States v. Otha C. Bailey, Sr.
  607 F.2d 237· 9th Cir.· 1979-10-01 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the government's wiretap applications complied with statutory requirements and that the evidence was sufficient to convict Bailey and Whitney, but insufficient to convict Moss of conspiracy.
• United States v. Marable
  574 F.2d 224· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-30 ·cited 70×·via Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Marable of heroin conspiracy and that the trial court did not err in denying severance or excluding testimony.
• United States v. West
  574 F.2d 1131· 4th Cir.· 1978-02-13 ·cited 70×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the admission of grand jury testimony violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser.
• United States v. Brand
  556 F.2d 1312· 5th Cir.· 1977-08-05 ·cited 70×·via Possession Of Cocaine Hydrochloride With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that a 20-month preindictment delay did not violate due process or speedy trial rights, and the search warrant was validly issued based on corroborated hearsay and plain view evidence.
• United States v. Buckhanon
  505 F.2d 1079· 8th Cir.· 1974-11-13 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the search of the suitcase was constitutionally permissible, venue was proper, evidence of other criminal conduct was admissible to show identity and plan, the attorney's testimony was not required, co-conspirator statements were admissible, and the evidence w
• United States v. Santana
  485 F.2d 365· 2d Cir.· 1973-10-01 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the seizure of cocaine was lawful under the plain view doctrine, and the prosecutor's summation and jury instructions did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial.
• United States v. Rivera
  900 F.2d 1462· 10th Cir.· 1990-04-04 ·cited 69×
  The court held that while there were trial errors, the cumulative effect did not warrant reversal due to a lack of demonstrated prejudice. Resentencing is necessary.
• United States v. Disla
  805 F.2d 1340· 9th Cir.· 1986-12-08 ·cited 69×
  The court held that the admission of Disla's post-arrest statement was harmless error and affirmed his convictions for conspiracy, possession, and wire fraud, but reversed his conviction for aiding and abetting possession.
• United States v. Shapiro
  669 F.2d 593· 9th Cir.· 1982-03-01 ·cited 69×
  A new trial is warranted when facts reveal a substantial likelihood of prejudice due to jury taint, even if a tainted juror is excused before deliberations.
• United States v. Davis
  617 F.2d 677· D.C. Cir.· 1979-10-26 ·cited 69×
  The court held that grand jury testimony given pursuant to a plea agreement, even if the defendant later withdraws from the agreement, is not inadmissible under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(e)(6) and can be admitted if voluntary and not the fruit of prior illegal conduct
• United States v. Santiago
  906 F.2d 867· 2d Cir.· 1990-06-22 ·cited 68×
  The court held that prior uncharged narcotics transactions can be considered for sentencing if part of the same course of conduct, but a defendant cannot be denied acceptance of responsibility for refusing to admit to such uncharged conduct.
• United States v. Rubiel Marin-Cifuentes
  866 F.2d 988· 8th Cir.· 1989-01-19 ·cited 68×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding no error in the admission of evidence, sufficiency of evidence, denial of severance, or sentencing.
• United States v. Athanasios Theodoropoulos
  866 F.2d 587· 3d Cir.· 1989-01-17 ·cited 68×
  The court held that expert testimony on coded conversations and defendants' roles was admissible, and that sufficient evidence supported the drug and firearm convictions.
• United States v. GAY
  774 F.2d 368· 10th Cir.· 1985-09-26 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the chain of custody was adequate, and the searches and seizures were lawful, including statements made before Miranda warnings.
• United States v. Perry
  747 F.2d 1165· 7th Cir.· 1984-11-05 ·cited 68×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the defendant's convictions for conspiracy to distribute cocaine and possession with intent to distribute cocaine.
• United States v. Sigfredo Rivera-Sola
  713 F.2d 866· 1st Cir.· 1983-07-27 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of attempted possession with intent to distribute, that evidence of other crimes was properly admitted to show intent, and that the magistrate's participation in jury selection and preliminary instructions d
• United States v. Willis
  639 F.2d 1335· 5th Cir.· 1981-03-19 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the Coast Guard had authority to board and search the vessel, but reversed the convictions of the two crewmen due to insufficient evidence of their knowledge of the marijuana conspiracy.
• United States v. Valencia
  645 F.2d 1158· 2d Cir.· 1980-09-18 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the entrapment defense is not available when the inducement comes from a private citizen, even if that citizen informed the defendant about government inducement.
• United States v. Goodman
  605 F.2d 870· 5th Cir.· 1979-11-01 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the admission of coconspirator statements made during and in furtherance of the conspiracy was proper under Federal Rule of Evidence 801(d)(2)(E) and did not violate the appellants' Sixth Amendment right to confrontation. The court also found that limitations
• United States v. Martinez
  588 F.2d 495· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-26 ·cited 68×
  The court held that routine border detentions and searches do not require probable cause, and Miranda warnings are not necessary for routine customs inquiries. The evidence was sufficient to prove constructive possession.
• United States v. Caro
  569 F.2d 411· 5th Cir.· 1978-03-10 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the admissible evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the government, was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant knowingly participated in the conspiracy.
• United States v. Baldarrama
  566 F.2d 560· 5th Cir.· 1978-01-20 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy and aiding and abetting, and that the admission of a prior conviction was proper for showing identity. The court also found no reversible error in other evidentiary or procedural claims.
• United States v. Drayton Curry
  512 F.2d 1299· 4th Cir.· 1975-04-03 ·cited 68×
  The court held that a prosecutor's improper question about a defendant's character was prejudicial to one defendant but not the other, and that certain drug offenses merge for sentencing purposes.
• United States v. Anderson
  509 F.2d 724· 9th Cir.· 1974-09-20 ·cited 68×·via Possession Of Heroin With Intent To Distribute
  The court held that the warrantless search was justified by probable cause and exigent circumstances, and that the use of an in camera hearing to protect informant identity was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Petty
  798 F.2d 1157· 8th Cir.· 1986-08-15 ·cited 67×
  The court held that a prior conviction under New York law, even if arising from a single indictment and resulting in concurrent sentences, can count as multiple convictions for sentence enhancement purposes if it involved multiple victims. The court also held that initiating the
• United States v. Palafox
  764 F.2d 558· 9th Cir.· 1985-06-24 ·cited 67×
  The dissenting judge argues that the defendant committed two distinct crimes warranting separate convictions and punishments, as the case does not fit the established exceptions to the general rule.
• United States v. J.R. "Buddy" Carter
  760 F.2d 1568· 11th Cir.· 1985-05-28 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the defendants' arguments regarding severance, the warrantless search of the aircraft, comments on silence, admission of extrinsic evidence, and sentencing were without merit. The convictions were affirmed.
• United States v. Campa
  679 F.2d 1006· 1st Cir.· 1982-05-27 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for aiding and abetting, that the display of unoffered tapes was not prejudicial, that prosecutorial comments were not improper, that a principal need not be identified or convicted, and that the defendant
• United States v. Laughman
  618 F.2d 1067· 4th Cir.· 1980-04-11 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the warrantless search of the sailing vessel was justified by probable cause and exigent circumstances, and that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute marijuana.
• United States v. Patrice Mespoulede
  597 F.2d 329· 2d Cir.· 1979-04-10 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the doctrine of collateral estoppel, as an element of the double jeopardy clause, precludes the government from relitigating an issue necessarily decided in the defendant's favor by a prior jury's acquittal, even if that issue is not essential to a conviction
• United States v. Fuentes
  563 F.2d 527· 2d Cir.· 1977-09-14 ·cited 67×·via Possession With Intent To Distribute Cocaine
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that tape recordings were admissible, the informant's absence did not violate confrontation rights, and the trial court did not err in refusing a second competency examination.
• United States v. Anderson
  500 F.2d 1311· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-27 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the informant's tip, corroborated by independent investigation, provided probable cause for the warrantless search of Anderson's car and the arrests of all appellants. The warrantless search of claimed luggage was unconstitutional, but the error was harmless.