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 evidence was sufficient for conviction and that the trial court did not err in denying motions for acquittal and a new trial.
-
The court held that the warrantless searches of the vessel, tractor-trailer, and van were permissible under the Fourth Amendment, but reversed convictions for importation due to insufficient evidence of foreign origin.
-
The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to suppress because the officer had reasonable suspicion to stop and search the vehicle.
-
The court held that the district court erred in suppressing the defendant's oral confessions, finding them to be voluntarily made.
-
The court held that the search of the airplane constituted a permissible extended border search based on radar tracking, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to personally examine the plane.
-
The court held that the trial court did not err in admitting the appellant's confession and seized items into evidence, affirming the conviction.
-
The court held that the second search of the vehicle was a valid border search, and the evidence obtained was admissible.
-
The court affirmed convictions for federal narcotics law violations, remanding only for vacation of special parole terms conflicting with the Youth Corrections Act.
-
The court held that the Randado checkpoint is the functional equivalent of the border and that the search of the appellant's camper was reasonable. The conviction is affirmed.
-
The court held that the arresting officer had probable cause to search the vehicle and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing an in-court experiment.
-
The court held that the Border Patrol agent had probable cause to search the vehicle and its contents based on the odor of marijuana and plain view observations.
-
The magistrate's determination of probable cause to search Chester's residence was improper because the affidavit did not establish probable cause, only mere suspicion.
-
The court held that the admission of a co-defendant's statement against appellant, based solely on his silence while under arrest, was erroneous.
-
The court held that a specific 'no-benefit' finding under 18 U.S.C. § 4209 is not required before sentencing a 'young adult offender' under other applicable penalty provisions.
-
Even if the initial stop at the checkpoint was illegal, the defendant's subsequent flight and the ensuing chase provided independent probable cause for his arrest and the search of his vehicle.
-
The court held that imposing an adult sentence consecutively to a Youth Corrections Act commitment is inconsistent and erroneous.
-
The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence for conspiracy and lawful search and seizure.
-
The court held that customs authorities had sufficient suspicion to justify the border strip search, making it reasonable and not a violation of constitutional rights.
-
The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to require the government to identify its informant, nor in denying the motion to suppress evidence, and that the indictment and trial were proper.
-
The court held that the jury instruction on the intent required for importation of cocaine was prejudicially deficient, allowing for conviction on an erroneous theory of liability.
-
The court held that the border patrol agent's stop and search of the vehicle, including the customs agent's detection of marijuana odor, did not violate the Fourth Amendment.
-
The court held that the jury instructions on intent to distribute were proper, conforming to established legal standards rather than the challenged statutory provision.
-
148 So. 3d 480·
Fla. 2d DCA·
2014-09-19
·cited 11×
Matthew Willis appeals his conviction for twenty counts of possession of child pornography after images were found on his cell phone during a warrantless search incident to a traffic stop. The court reversed and remanded, holding that the warrantless search violated the Fourth Am
-
The court held that the boric acid and cocaine in the packages did not constitute a "mixture" under the Sentencing Guidelines because the cocaine was not commingled with the boric acid and the boric acid was not a usable cutting agent or distribution medium.
-
The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the evidence was legally obtained, the testimony admissible, and the sentence lawful.
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion, and the district court did not err in its jury instructions or in allowing a witness to invoke the Fifth Amendment.
-
The court held that the defendant was entitled to a jury instruction on the defense of mere presence, and the denial of this instruction warranted reversal.
-
The court held that the defendant waived his Batson claim by failing to respond to the government's explanations for its peremptory challenges, and even if not waived, the explanations were sufficient and race-neutral.
-
The court held that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the defendant's conviction for drug offenses.
-
The court held that wiretaps were lawful, the exclusionary rule's good faith exception applied, and the retrial did not violate double jeopardy. Sentences were affirmed.
-
The court held that the officers had probable cause to arrest the defendant based on his behavior and the visible bulge, making the subsequent seizure of cocaine incident to a lawful arrest.
-
The court held that the trial judge did not err in referring jury questions back to instructions, refusing a specific entrapment burden instruction, or admitting allegedly garbled tape recordings.
-
Passengers impliedly consent to a visual inspection and limited hand search of their luggage if an x-ray scan is inconclusive for weapons or explosives, as a condition of airline travel.
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict Ruiz of possession with intent to distribute cocaine and that Alvarez was not unlawfully seized, thus denying his motion to suppress.
-
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the prior testimony of an allegedly unavailable witness.
-
The court held that the convictions for possession of firearms should be vacated as they arose from a single offense, but affirmed the marihuana possession convictions.
-
The court held that the warrantless search of Haley's airplane was a valid border search because the facts known to Customs agents prior to the search reasonably supported an inference that there was a substantial likelihood the airplane originated from a foreign location.
-
The court held that the district court must re-evaluate its denial of the defendant's speedy trial motion in light of the "reasonably necessary" time standard established in United States v. Mitchell, as the record lacks sufficient justification for the extended delay.
-
The court held that the magistrate's failure to certify the accuracy of a transcribed telephonic search warrant did not require suppression of evidence when there was no constitutional violation, prejudice, or bad faith.
-
The court held that continuances granted at the defendant's request, based on findings that the ends of justice outweighed the public's and defendant's interest in a speedy trial, are excludable from the Speedy Trial Act's time computation.
-
The court held that an affidavit containing a negligent misrepresentation does not automatically invalidate the search warrant or subsequent convictions.
-
The court held that the district court's entrapment instruction, which required the defendant to admit guilt to the charged acts as a prerequisite to claiming entrapment, constituted plain error requiring reversal.
-
The court held that the trial court's admonition regarding perjury did not deny due process, the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction, and the sentence disparity was not substantial enough to require explanation.
-
The dissenting judge would reverse the order of suppression, finding the stop of the car constitutional.
-
913 So. 2d 69·
Fla. 4th DCA·
2005-09-28
·cited 10×
Florida appealed a trial court's order suppressing evidence from a vehicle search following a traffic stop for a broken taillight. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the officer lawfully stopped the vehicle based on reasonable cause to believe the tailligh
-
711 So. 2d 1154·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1998-01-16
·cited 10×
Florida appellate court reversed drug delivery and possession convictions because the State failed to introduce the cocaine into evidence at trial, despite the defendant's timely objection.
-
The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence to support the conspiracy and firearms charges against the appellants and upholding the trial court's evidentiary rulings.
-
The court held that sufficient evidence supported the conspiracy conviction and that the district court did not err in calculating the sentence, including considering acquitted conduct and hearsay testimony.
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, the district judge did not err in vacating the magistrate's order compelling the informant's attendance, and the judge did not err in refusing to suppress evidence or statements.
-
The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the district judge's questioning did not constitute plain error.