Sufficiency Of Evidence Standard (Jackson V. Virginia)

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

• United States v. Whitten
  706 F.2d 1000· 9th Cir.· 1983-05-25 ·cited 159×
  The court held that the evidence seized was admissible, affirming the convictions, as the searches, while having some irregularities, were substantially lawful and the evidence obtained fell within the scope of the warrants or exceptions thereto. The court also found the evidence
• United States v. Jefferson
  714 F.2d 689· 7th Cir.· 1983-07-22 ·cited 142×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the searches were lawful, the evidence was properly admitted, the jury instructions were adequate, and the sentencing did not violate double jeopardy principles.
• United States v. Ibrahim Abushi
  682 F.2d 1289· 9th Cir.· 1982-06-08 ·cited 106×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a single conspiracy conviction and that the joinder and severance rulings were not an abuse of discretion. The entrapment defense was also rejected.
• United States v. Yehuda Draiman
  784 F.2d 248· 7th Cir.· 1986-02-21 ·cited 82×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the mail fraud convictions, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings.
• United States v. Serrano
  870 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1989-03-01 ·cited 72×
  The court held that Serrano and Boscio's convictions were supported by sufficient evidence, but Stamps' conviction was tainted by inadmissible hearsay, requiring a new trial.
• Smith v. J.D. White
  815 F.2d 1401· 11th Cir.· 1987-05-01 ·cited 71×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions and that the petitioner did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel or make involuntary statements.
• United States v. Lester
  749 F.2d 1288· 9th Cir.· 1984-12-18 ·cited 68×
  The court held that 18 U.S.C. § 1503's omnibus clause covers non-coercive witness tampering, and that sufficient evidence supported the conspiracy convictions under both § 1503 and § 1510.
• Tolbert Dickson v. Louie L. Wainwright
  683 F.2d 348· 11th Cir.· 1982-08-16 ·cited 67×
  The court held that while sufficiency of evidence and evidentiary/prosecutorial misconduct claims were properly denied, the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding pretrial preparation warranted further inquiry.
• United States v. Jones
  801 F.2d 304· 8th Cir.· 1986-09-11 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the defendants' Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) convictions, and that Wharton's Rule did not bar the conspiracy conviction. Other alleged errors were also found to be without merit.
• United States v. Ramirez
  796 F.2d 212· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-14 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendants of conspiracy to possess cocaine with intent to distribute and using a communication facility in furtherance of that conspiracy. The court also held that the trial judge did not err in allowing an FBI agent
• United States v. Goudy
  792 F.2d 664· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-06 ·cited 58×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings on evidentiary hearings, probable cause, jury instructions, indictment challenges, ineffective assistance of counsel, severance, or sufficiency of evidence.
• United States v. Harry Christian (84-5843)
  786 F.2d 203· 6th Cir.· 1986-03-13 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a new trial based on undisclosed evidence, nor in limiting cross-examination, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Hooks
  848 F.2d 785· 7th Cir.· 1988-06-08 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for conspiring to defraud the United States and for aiding in the filing of a false estate tax return, and that the admission of a co-conspirator's statement was proper.
• United States v. Radtke
  799 F.2d 298· 7th Cir.· 1986-08-18 ·cited 46×
  The court held that sufficient evidence existed to support the jury's conclusion that the stolen vehicles were moving in interstate commerce at the time of the defendant's activities, and that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to suppress without an evidentiary he
• United States v. Lopez
  851 F.2d 520· 1st Cir.· 1988-07-13 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the substantive RICO conviction was time-barred because the predicate acts occurred more than five years before the indictment, but the RICO conspiracy conviction was not time-barred as the conspiracy continued until the indictment date. The court also found n
• United States v. Apodaca
  843 F.2d 421· 10th Cir.· 1988-04-01 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding that the defendant organized, supervised, or managed five or more persons for the Continuing Criminal Enterprise conviction. The court also held that admitting evidence of unindicted offenses did not co
• United States v. Alverson
  666 F.2d 341· 9th Cir.· 1982-01-04 ·cited 45×
  The court should not mandate reassignment of a resentencing to a new judge without compelling reason.
• United States v. Byrd
  771 F.2d 215· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-19 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the admission of a prior conviction for impeachment purposes and testimony regarding uncharged misconduct were not reversible errors, either because they were properly admitted or constituted harmless error.
• United States v. DeROSA
  670 F.2d 889· 9th Cir.· 1982-03-04 ·cited 43×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain convictions for RICO and narcotics violations, and that the trial court did not err in denying severance motions or in its rulings on other claims.
• United States v. Troop
  890 F.2d 1393· 7th Cir.· 1989-12-05 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy, possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and possession of a firearm during a drug offense, and that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence of prior bad acts or co-conspirat
• United States v. Lerma
  657 F.2d 786· 5th Cir.· 1981-09-30 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings, that sufficient evidence supported the conviction, and that the indictment was not fundamentally defective.
• United States v. Hale
  784 F.2d 1465· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-21 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the warrant was invalid as to the magazine 'Joe and His Uncle' due to lack of specific description, reversing convictions based on that item. However, sufficient evidence supported the remaining convictions.
• United States v. Clevenger
  733 F.2d 1356· 9th Cir.· 1984-05-30 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove criminal intent for conspiracy, mail fraud, and wire fraud, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance.
• United States v. Badalamenti
  794 F.2d 821· 2d Cir.· 1986-07-02 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the district judge properly admitted wiretap evidence despite sealing delays, allowed an informant's statement under the hearsay exception for intent, and permitted the admission of co-conspirator statements made before a defendant joined the conspiracy.
• United States v. Perez
  767 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1985-07-02 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the in-court identification was admissible, the evidence was sufficient to support convictions, discovery rules were not violated, pretrial publicity did not prejudice the jury, and sentences were not excessive.
• People OF the Territory OF Guam v. Ojeda
  758 F.2d 403· 9th Cir.· 1985-04-16 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for burglary was supported by sufficient evidence and that any alleged prosecutorial misconduct or evidentiary errors were either harmless or properly addressed by the trial court.
• United States v. Monty Phillip McCLELLAN
  868 F.2d 210· 7th Cir.· 1989-01-27 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the transfer of two cars in a single transaction constituted only one offense of bankruptcy fraud, requiring resentencing. However, the court affirmed the admission of prior testimony and the sufficiency of evidence for other convictions.
• United States v. Gabriel
  810 F.2d 627· 7th Cir.· 1987-01-15 ·cited 34×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence of criminal intent to sustain the defendants' convictions for conspiracy, solicitation, attempted arson, and aiding and abetting. The court also held that one defendant was precluded from asserting the entrapment defense.
• United States v. Lamp
  779 F.2d 1088· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-06 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evidentiary rulings or jury instructions, and that the sentences were not disproportionate.
• United States v. Harlan M. Balk
  706 F.2d 1056· 9th Cir.· 1983-05-27 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the combining of regular and alternate peremptory challenges, while not condoned, was not reversible error without a showing of prejudice, and that the denial of a discovery motion for selective prosecution was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Williams
  923 F.2d 1397· 10th Cir.· 1990-12-26 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the admission of the IOU and traffic ticket as evidence was proper, and there was sufficient evidence to support the defendant's convictions for conspiracy, firearms possession during a drug crime, and maintaining a premises for drug distribution.
• Braxton v. Estelle
  641 F.2d 392· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-03 ·cited 32×
  The court held that the petitioner's numerous complaints were without merit and affirmed the District Court's denial of his § 2254 petition.
• United States v. Alicio M. Sanchez (89-2432) & Reinaldo Cubilla (89-2433)
  928 F.2d 1450· 6th Cir.· 1991-03-28 ·cited 30×
  The Court affirmed the convictions but remanded for resentencing, finding that the sharing of an interpreter did not violate the Court Interpreters Act or the Sixth Amendment, and that the jury instructions regarding conspiracy and drug quantity were not erroneous. The Court also
• United States v. Williams
  910 F.2d 1574· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-27 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient for conviction and that the district court's upward departure in sentencing was justified by other factors despite an error in considering prior arrests.
• United States v. Miles Davis Saunders
  973 F.2d 1354· 7th Cir.· 1992-09-03 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in limiting cross-examination, that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, that the jury instructions were adequate, and that the Sentencing Guidelines were applied constitutionally.
• United States v. Landry
  903 F.2d 334· 5th Cir.· 1990-05-30 ·cited 29×
  The court affirmed the conviction but vacated the sentence, remanding for resentencing because the district court's upward departure from the Sentencing Guidelines was unreasonable and lacked proper notice to the defendant.
• United States v. Skillman
  922 F.2d 1370· 9th Cir.· 1990-09-14 ·cited 28×
  The court affirmed the conviction but remanded for reconsideration of the sentence, finding the district court erred in granting a reduction for acceptance of responsibility.
• United States v. Hopkins
  916 F.2d 207· 5th Cir.· 1990-10-19 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendants' convictions for conspiracy, concealment, misapplication, and false entries, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance or admitting evidence of a prior bad act.
• United States v. Reiswitz
  941 F.2d 488· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-15 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the inclusion of a state robbery as an overt act in a federal conspiracy indictment was permissible and that the jury instructions on conspiracy and aiding and abetting were proper.
• United States v. Aureliano Galindo Vasquez
  909 F.2d 235· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-01 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a canine sniff of a garage from a public alley is not a Fourth Amendment search, and the presence of firearms in a drug-trafficking offense can constitute 'use' under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) if they provide security and confidence. The court also affirmed the distr
• United States v. Sim Ed Moree
  897 F.2d 1329· 5th Cir.· 1990-03-29 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the conviction for conspiracy and endeavoring to obstruct justice but vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing.
• United States v. Petitjean
  883 F.2d 1341· 7th Cir.· 1989-09-05 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the defendant's arguments regarding a duplicitous indictment, insufficient evidence, confrontation clause violations, and sentencing procedures were without merit, affirming his convictions.
• United States v. Garver
  809 F.2d 1291· 7th Cir.· 1987-01-15 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting co-conspirator statements, evidence of fee payments, and denying severance motions, and that sufficient evidence supported the convictions for conspiracy, mail fraud, and RICO violations.
• United States v. Brown
  699 F.2d 704· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-22 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the jury selection procedures did not constitute reversible error, and the evidence was sufficient for most convictions, but reversed one mail fraud count due to insufficient evidence and remanded for reconsideration of restitution.
• United States v. Carlotta Santana Saavedra
  684 F.2d 1293· 9th Cir.· 1982-08-24 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the appellant's constitutional and statutory speedy trial rights were not violated, that evidentiary challenges were without merit, and that the evidence was sufficient to support her convictions.
• Miller v. A.A. Stagner and R.L. Pulley
  757 F.2d 988· 9th Cir.· 1985-04-08 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the defendant's constitutional right to be present at critical stages of the trial was violated when he was excluded from an in camera juror disqualification hearing.
• United States v. Alvarez
  833 F.2d 724· 7th Cir.· 1987-11-18 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the convictions of both defendants, finding no abuse of discretion in evidentiary rulings and sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdicts.
• United States v. Poschwatta
  829 F.2d 1477· 9th Cir.· 1987-10-13 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for failure to file income tax returns and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings or procedural decisions.
• United States v. Conley
  826 F.2d 551· 7th Cir.· 1987-07-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's conviction for willful attempt to evade and defeat the payment of income taxes, and that the trial court did not err in admitting evidence or in its jury instructions.
• United States v. Salim Fakhoury
  819 F.2d 1415· 7th Cir.· 1987-05-26 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the appellant's convictions, finding sufficient evidence for attempted arson and mail fraud, and that the admission of prior misconduct evidence and prosecutorial remarks did not deny a fair trial.