56 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 2,495 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
The court held that the government's conduct was not outrageous, there was sufficient evidence of possession, and evidentiary rulings were not reversible error. The convictions are affirmed.
-
The court held that the defendant was lawfully subjected to a Terry stop based on reasonable suspicion and that probable cause existed for his arrest, affirming his conviction.
-
The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting testimony regarding the giving of Miranda rights, refusing to disclose an informant's identity, or denying a motion for severance.
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, and the jury instructions regarding aiding and abetting, exculpatory statements, and the refusal of a lesser included offense instruction were proper.
-
The court held that prosecutorial comments during closing argument were not improper or prejudicial, and that defense counsel cannot argue jury nullification.
-
The court held that the trial judge's questioning did not deny a fair trial, the admission of co-conspirators' guilty pleas was permissible with a limiting instruction, and consecutive sentences for conspiracy to import/distribute and for importing/possessing with intent to distr
-
The court held that a conspiracy conviction is a lesser included offense of engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise, requiring vacation of the conspiracy sentence due to double jeopardy. Other convictions were affirmed.
-
The court held that the trial judge's repeated remarks and interventions, which created an appearance of unfairness and favoritism towards the prosecution, warranted reversal of the convictions.
-
The court held that the search warrant was properly issued based on probable cause derived from DEA investigation and a narcotics detection dog's alert, and that the search of the handbags was within the scope of the warrant. It also held that while some hearsay testimony was imp
-
The court held that appellants abandoned the suitcase containing cocaine, thus relinquishing a reasonable expectation of privacy and lacking standing to challenge the warrantless search.
-
The court held that the admission of a false driver's license was not plain error and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for importation and possession of cocaine with intent to distribute.
-
The court held that a jury's note questioning a defendant's guilt, even if suggesting a misunderstanding of the law, cannot be used to impeach a general verdict of guilty, as the jury's deliberative process is protected from judicial inquiry.
-
The court held that the patdown search and subsequent interrogation were constitutional, and the admission of the defendant's statements was proper.
-
The court held that reasonable suspicion, not real suspicion, is the standard for strip searches at the border and that the defendant was not prejudiced by the government's failure to disclose certain statements prior to trial.
-
The court held that the warrantless insertion of an electronic beeper into contraband packages, which the appellant had no right to possess, did not violate his constitutional rights.
-
The court held that visual observation into an aircraft is not a search under the Fourth Amendment, and a warrantless search of the aircraft and seizure of contraband were justified by exigent circumstances. The denial of motions to suppress and for acquittal were also affirmed.
-
The installation of an electronic tracking device on a motor vehicle constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment, requiring a warrant. Evidence obtained from an unlawful search is inadmissible as 'fruit of the poisonous tree'.
-
The dissenting judge believes the case should be remanded for supplementation on factual issues regarding an addict-informant's testimony before a final decision on conviction.
-
Three defendants convicted of maritime drug trafficking under the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (MDLEA) appealed their convictions and sentences for conspiracy to possess and possess with intent to distribute over five kilograms of cocaine aboard a stateless vessel in interna
-
The court held that the defendant's allegations of falsity in the search warrant affidavits were insufficient to warrant an evidentiary hearing and that the jury instructions were adequate. However, the court vacated one of the firearm convictions based on precedent regarding mul
-
The court held that the police encounter did not constitute a Fourth Amendment seizure and that the defendant voluntarily consented to the search of his bag, thus the evidence was admissible. The conviction for failure to appear was also affirmed.
-
The court held that the district court did not err in admitting co-conspirator testimony, denying a motion for directed verdict due to insufficient evidence, or refusing to permit a witness to testify.
-
The court held that the initial encounter was consensual, and the subsequent detention ripened into a lawful Terry-type stop only after the suspects provided inconsistent information, which, combined with drug courier profile characteristics, established reasonable suspicion.
-
The acquittal of a co-defendant on a conspiracy charge does not render inadmissible co-conspirator statements used to convict the remaining defendant on other charges, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
-
435 So. 2d 304·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1983-06-28
·cited 39×
Appellant was convicted of trafficking in cocaine, possession of cocaine with intent to sell, and possession of marijuana with intent to sell after a drug raid on his apartment. The court affirmed the trafficking conviction but reversed the conviction and sentence for possession
-
The court held that the warrantless arrests and subsequent searches of paper bags were lawful as incidents to arrest, and the entry into Fleming's home was justified by exigent circumstances. Evidence was sufficient for conviction and forfeiture.
-
The court held that the district court did not apply the correct standard for determining voluntary consent to search Sanchez's apartment, vacating Sanchez and Alvarez's convictions. The convictions of Maldonado, Delgado, and Dominguez were affirmed.
-
The court adheres to the result of the main opinion but expresses concern over the admission of hearsay evidence.
-
The court held that the search of checked luggage based on mere suspicion, without probable cause, violated Fourth Amendment standards.
-
616 So. 2d 504·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1993-03-16
·cited 38×
Bruce was convicted of possession of crack cocaine with intent to sell after police found thirteen individually wrapped rocks. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, holding that the quantity, individual packaging, and expert testimony regarding typical drug dealer profiles
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction and that the defendant failed to exhaust administrative remedies for credit for time spent on electronic monitoring.
-
The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support a conspiracy conviction, and the derivative firearms conviction must also be reversed, but the forfeiture order could stand based on the possession conviction.
-
The court held that the district court did not err in considering unadjudicated conduct to calculate the defendant's base offense level and in applying an upward adjustment for his leadership role in a drug conspiracy.
-
The court held that the evidence supported a jury instruction on deliberate ignorance, but the district court erred by concluding that a defendant's rehabilitative potential was irrelevant to sentencing within the applicable guideline range.
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions of Ivey, Johnson, and Nance for drug-related offenses, and that the district court properly applied the inevitable discovery doctrine.
-
The court held that the district court did not err in admitting and allowing the use of translated transcripts of Spanish conversations, refusing a defense transcript, responding to a jury question, finding sufficient evidence for constructive possession, or in sentencing decisio
-
The court affirmed the conviction, forfeiture, and sentence, finding no error in the Travel Act violation evidence, search warrant validity, expert testimony, admission of evidence, or sentencing.
-
The court held that exigent circumstances justified the warrantless entry and that the defendant's consent to search was voluntary, affirming the denial of the suppression motion. However, the court reversed the sentence, finding the district court misapplied the Sentencing Guide
-
The court held that the observed facts were insufficient to establish probable cause for Ingrao's arrest, thus violating the Fourth Amendment.
-
The court held that the district court did not err in denying a bill of particulars without demonstrated prejudice, and that the admission of a polygraph clause in a plea agreement was not reversible error. However, the court vacated Perrino's sentence due to a violation of Rule
-
The court held that the evidence obtained from the search of the defendant's train compartment and luggage was admissible because the defendant voluntarily consented to the search.
-
The court held that the evidence was insufficient to establish a conspiracy, but sufficient for possession with intent to distribute.
-
The court held that the trial court did not err in excluding testimony regarding threats made to a co-conspirator not directly communicated to the defendant, nor did the government's conduct violate due process.
-
Federal law, not state constitutional law, governs the admissibility of evidence in a federal prosecution, even if the investigation was conducted solely by state officials. The use of a disjunctive jury interrogatory regarding guilt was harmless error in this case.
-
The court affirmed the judgments of conviction, holding that the indictments were timely filed and properly sealed, and that the tax evasion and false filing charges were adequately pleaded.
-
The court held that the defendant was not illegally detained and that there was sufficient evidence to prove knowing possession of the cocaine.
-
The court held that a defendant's severance claim based on a co-defendant's silence fails without a showing of compelling prejudice from antagonistic defenses, and that a conviction under 21 U.S.C.A. § 848 for engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise is supported by evidence
-
The court held that Jody Caddell's consent to tape-recorded calls was voluntary, but the search warrant affidavit lacked probable cause due to insufficient underlying circumstances from the informants.
-
The court held that law enforcement officials lacked probable cause to arrest Everroad without a warrant, rendering the subsequent seizure of evidence unlawful.
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to establish the vessel was of United States registry and that the appellants' convictions for conspiracy and possession with intent to distribute marijuana were valid.