Relief From Prejudicial Joinder

59 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• United States v. Roselli
  432 F.2d 879· 9th Cir.· 1970-09-28 ·cited 253×
  The court held that the scheme to cheat at card games for profit constituted an 'unlawful activity' under 18 U.S.C. § 1952, and that knowledge of interstate travel or facility use is not an essential element for conspiracy or substantive violations of §§ 1952 and 2314.
• United States v. Milan Bagaric
  706 F.2d 42· 2d Cir.· 1983-04-14 ·cited 176×
  The court held that the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) applies to enterprises with mixed political and economic motives, as long as there is a pattern of racketeering activity and an enterprise, and the conduct implicates RICO's remedial purposes.
• United States v. Franks
  511 F.2d 25· 6th Cir.· 1975-02-12 ·cited 116×
  The court held that the joinder of defendants and offenses was proper, and that the admission of evidence, including tape recordings and voiceprint analysis, did not constitute reversible error. The court also found no violation of speedy trial rights or grounds for recusal.
• United States v. Bledsoe
  674 F.2d 647· 8th Cir.· 1982-03-12 ·cited 115×
  The court held that the evidence presented was sufficient to prove the existence of a RICO enterprise and that joinder of defendants was proper, or any misjoinder constituted harmless error.
• United States v. Rabbitt
  583 F.2d 1014· 8th Cir.· 1978-09-05 ·cited 112×
  The court held that while joinder of offenses was proper, the evidence was insufficient to sustain mail fraud and Hobbs Act convictions related to the Berger-Field architectural contracts, reversing those convictions.
• United States v. McDONALD
  576 F.2d 1350· 9th Cir.· 1978-05-04 ·cited 108×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to sustain McDonald's convictions for mail fraud and interstate transportation of fraudulently obtained property, reversing his conviction. The convictions of the other appellants were affirmed.
• United States v. Arruda
  715 F.2d 671· 1st Cir.· 1983-08-12 ·cited 90×
  The court held that the joinder of defendants and offenses was proper, the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, and the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• United States v. Welch
  656 F.2d 1039· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-21 ·cited 89×
  The court held that the RICO substantive count provided sufficient nexus to join two otherwise separate conspiracies under Fed.R.Crim.P. 8(b), and affirmed convictions for most defendants and charges, but reversed Satterwhite's RICO conviction due to insufficient evidence.
• Cataneo v. United States
  167 F.2d 820· 4th Cir.· 1948-04-28 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the joinder of offenses and defendants, consolidation of indictments for trial, and admission of evidence were permissible under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and did not constitute an abuse of discretion or prejudicial error.
• United States v. Weber
  437 F.2d 327· 3d Cir.· 1970-12-30 ·cited 69×
  The court held that consolidating indictments was proper and admitting hearsay statements from a deceased co-conspirator did not violate the defendant's rights.
• United States v. Fagan
  821 F.2d 1002· 5th Cir.· 1987-06-30 ·cited 67×
  The court held that the mail fraud, witness intimidation, and interstate threat charges were properly joined and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Yarbrough
  852 F.2d 1522· 9th Cir.· 1988-07-06 ·cited 64×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding no reversible error in the pretrial, trial, or sentencing phases.
• United States v. Tombrello
  666 F.2d 485· 11th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 61×
  The court held that proof of the conspirators' belief that their illegal activity would yield more than $5,000 is sufficient to satisfy the jurisdictional requirements for a conspiracy to violate 18 U.S.C. § 2314, and that docket entries are admissible to prove a pending indictme
• United States v. Webster
  734 F.2d 1048· 5th Cir.· 1984-06-11 ·cited 58×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the district court's rulings on severance, wiretap orders, search warrants, or continuance motions.
• United States v. Daddano
  432 F.2d 1119· 7th Cir.· 1970-10-01 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the joinder of defendants and offenses was proper, the denial of a continuance due to pretrial publicity was not an abuse of discretion, and the trial court's handling of publicity during trial and restrictions on cross-examination were not reversible error. C
• United States v. Sutton
  605 F.2d 260· 6th Cir.· 1979-09-04 ·cited 54×
  The dissenting judge would affirm the convictions on substantive counts despite potential misjoinder, finding no reversible prejudice and agreeing with the denial of suppression motions.
• United States v. Pembrick Edward Foutz, Jr.
  540 F.2d 733· 4th Cir.· 1976-08-16 ·cited 54×
• United States v. Hutchings
  751 F.2d 230· 8th Cir.· 1984-12-26 ·cited 50×
  The court affirmed the judgment, finding that while certain evidence was improperly admitted, the overwhelming evidence of guilt rendered the errors harmless.
• United States v. Avarello
  592 F.2d 1339· 5th Cir.· 1979-04-13 ·cited 44×
  The court affirmed convictions for conducting an illegal gambling business, holding that the evidence was sufficient to link defendants to a single business involving five or more persons and that various procedural and constitutional challenges lacked merit.
• United States v. Wilson
  434 F.2d 494· D.C. Cir.· 1970-06-11 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the defendants' challenges to the indictment and their claims of prejudice from joint trials were without merit, affirming their convictions.
• United States v. Herring
  602 F.2d 1220· 5th Cir.· 1979-09-24 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions, and the defendants received adequate representation and a fair trial.
• United States v. Frazier
  394 F.2d 258· 4th Cir.· 1968-04-15 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in denying severance motions and refusing an in camera inspection of the government file, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions.
• Meredith v. United States
  238 F.2d 535· 4th Cir.· 1956-11-07 ·cited 38×
  The court held that entries falsely representing uncollectible checks as cash items, made to deceive bank examiners, constitute a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1005, and that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions or admission of evidence.
• United States v. Possick
  849 F.2d 332· 8th Cir.· 1988-06-15 ·cited 36×
  The court held that while the evidence was sufficient to support the Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) conviction, the conspiracy conviction was a lesser included offense and must be vacated. Other convictions and the sentence were affirmed.
• United States v. Arden Lee Smith aka Alfredo Lama
  609 F.2d 1294· 9th Cir.· 1979-11-21 ·cited 35×
• United States v. Jones
  374 F.2d 414· 2d Cir.· 1967-03-14 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the joinder of counts was proper, the evidence was sufficient to support the perjury convictions, and the statements made in the affidavits were material. The court affirmed the judgments of conviction.
• United States v. Ulysses Gougis, Jr.
  374 F.2d 758· 7th Cir.· 1967-03-15 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the joinder of defendants with unrelated offenses and the joint representation of co-defendants with conflicting interests violated the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel, requiring reversal of one defendant's conviction.
• United States v. Fernandez
  892 F.2d 976· 11th Cir.· 1990-01-16 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the government presented sufficient evidence of interaction between defendants concerning a common illegal object to support a single conspiracy trial.
• United States v. Ferguson
  776 F.2d 217· 8th Cir.· 1985-10-17 ·cited 32×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the appellant waived his Speedy Trial Act rights by failing to object, that the expungement of prior convictions was validly handled, and that the evidence and jury instructions were proper.
• United States v. Riley
  530 F.2d 767· 8th Cir.· 1976-02-09 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in denying severance of counts and that there was sufficient evidence to convict the defendant of possessing a stolen Cadillac.
• United States v. Barbosa
  666 F.2d 704· 1st Cir.· 1981-12-09 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the denial of the severance motion was not an abuse of discretion and that prosecutorial misconduct claims were unfounded.
• United States v. Plaintiff-Appellee
  465 F.2d 408· 5th Cir.· 1972-07-24 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the appellant was not deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial and was not prejudiced by the joinder with other defendants.
• United States v. O'Connell
  703 F.2d 645· 1st Cir.· 1983-04-01 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy to possess stolen goods, receiving/possessing stolen goods, perjury, and assault on a federal officer, finding sufficient evidence and proper joinder.
• United States v. Silvio R. Diaz-Munoz
  632 F.2d 1330· 5th Cir.· 1980-12-19 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court erred in its handling of Brady materials and in its joinder of offenses and defendants, requiring reversal and remand for new trials.
• United States v. Shearer
  606 F.2d 819· 8th Cir.· 1979-10-05 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for severance, permitting an FBI agent to sit at counsel table, or submitting certain exhibits to the jury.
• United States v. Kellerman
  432 F.2d 371· 10th Cir.· 1970-09-28 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, as established in Leary v. United States, barred prosecution on count 7, requiring its dismissal. Other convictions were affirmed.
• Daley v. United States
  231 F.2d 123· 1st Cir.· 1956-03-30 ·cited 26×
  Consolidation of informations for trial was proper, and the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for engaging in a gambling business without paying the required tax or registering.
• United States v. Pimentel
  654 F.2d 538· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-15 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the defendant's arguments regarding peremptory challenges, voir dire, prosecutorial misconduct, and insufficient evidence lacked merit.
• United States v. Bowman
  602 F.2d 160· 8th Cir.· 1979-07-16 ·cited 25×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the appellant waived claims regarding severance and voir dire by failing to renew motions or object, and that evidence of other crimes was properly admitted to show intent.
• United States v. Wiley
  846 F.2d 150· 2d Cir.· 1988-05-06 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Reynolds' conviction for aiding and abetting the SCS wire fraud scheme, reversing that conviction. Other convictions were affirmed.
• Scheve v. United States
  184 F.2d 695· D.C. Cir.· 1950-08-14 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions for separate trials, as the offenses and defendants were properly joined under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and no prejudice resulted.
• United States v. Cannington
  729 F.2d 702· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the trial court did not err in its rulings on joinder, severance, co-conspirator statements, identification, discovery, prosecutorial comment, or sentencing.
• United States v. Pacente
  490 F.2d 661· 7th Cir.· 1973-12-28 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying the defendant's motion for severance, as the joinder of the extortion and false declaration counts created undue prejudice.
• United States v. Eldon Wayne McKUIN
  434 F.2d 391· 8th Cir.· 1970-10-16 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the joinder of offenses and defendants was proper, the limitation on cross-examination was not prejudicial, and the witness's assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege did not warrant a mistrial.
• United States v. Drum
  733 F.2d 1503· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-08 ·cited 18×
  The unauthorized duplication and interstate distribution of copyrighted material, even if initially acquired legitimately, violates the National Stolen Property Act, and such convictions can sustain RICO and Wire Fraud charges.
• United States v. Brown
  770 F.2d 768· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-03 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying requests for psychiatric examinations, admitting evidence under Rule 404(b), admitting passports under Rule 803(24), or denying motions for severance. The court also found that the indictment sufficien
• United States v. Leight
  818 F.2d 1297· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-05 ·cited 16×
  The court held that "similar act" evidence of prior abuse of other children was admissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) to show absence of accident, that copies of a destroyed X-ray were admissible, and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding that the murde
• United States v. Rochon
  575 F.2d 191· 8th Cir.· 1978-04-26 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance motions or continuances, and that no Brady violations occurred.
• United States v. Riley
  435 F.2d 725· 6th Cir.· 1970-12-09 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in denying motions for severance and suppression of evidence, and that the government sufficiently proved FDIC coverage.
• United States v. Leiva
  959 F.2d 637· 7th Cir.· 1992-03-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding time under the Speedy Trial Act, denying a severance, or applying the Sentencing Guidelines, and that sufficient evidence supported the conviction.