Cases

533 S.E.2d 653 (2000) 33 Va. App. 413 James Edward GRIFFIN, Jr. v. COMMONWEALTH of Virginia. Record No. 2131-99-4. Court of Appeals of Virginia, Alexandria. September 12, 2000. *655 Todd S. Baldwin (Baldwin, Molina, Escoto & Machado, P.C., on briefs), Washington, DC, for appellant. Virginia B. T

Opinion by Judge O’SCANNLAIN; Concurrence by Judge BERZON O’SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judge. We must decide several issues under the Fourth Amendment and the alien smuggling statutes presented by a scheme to bring Chinese aliens into the United States via Guam and Hawaii for financial gain. I On October 19, 1999, an Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) agent statio

Ashlee Nicole Scott v. State of Maryland, No. 853, September Term, 2024. Opinion by Lazerow, J. CRIMINAL LAW – SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE – ACCOMPLICE LIABILITY Accomplice liability manifests in two ways: first, responsibility for the principal offense, and second, responsibility for other criminal acts incidental to the commission of the principal offense. To establish a defendant’s responsibility for the principal offense, the State must prove that the accused participated in the offense e

727 S.W.2d 367 (1987) David Wayne LETT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, State. No. 2-85-280-CR. Court of Appeals of Texas, Fort Worth. April 1, 1987. Discretionary Review Granted June 24, 1987. *368 J.R. Molina, Fort Worth, for appellant. Tim Curry, Criminal Dist. Atty. and C. Chris Marshall, Asst. Crimi

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 95-5792 WAYNE MORRIS MITCHELL, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., Chief District Judge. (CR-94-217) Argued: October 28, 1996 Decided: January 15, 1997 Before WILKINS and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges,

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge WILKINS wrote the opinion, in which Judge LUTTIG and Senior Judge PHILLIPS joined. OPINION WILKINS, Circuit Judge: Wayne Morris Mitchell appeals his conviction for using or carrying a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking offense pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(c)(1) (West Supp.1996), argui

841 F.Supp. 1169 (1993) UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Johann Peter GRZEGANEK, Defendant. No. 93-6010-CR-NCR. United States District Court, S.D. Florida, Fort Lauderdale Division. December 30, 1993. *1170 James Boma, Asst. U.S. Atty., Office of U.S. Atty., Fort Lauderdale, FL, for plaintiff. Stephen J. Finta, Fort

643 F.Supp. 965 (1986) UNITED STATES of America v. Anthony C. CASTELBUONO, Defendant. No. 85 CR 168(S). United States District Court, E.D. New York. September 10, 1986. *966 Andrew J. Maloney, U.S. Atty., E.D. N.Y., Brooklyn, N.Y. by George Daniels, Marian J. Bachrach, Asst. U.S. Attys., for U.S. Fisher & Ely, P.C., Ne

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 497 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 498 Samuel Ivery was convicted after a jury trial of the capital offense of murder of Deborah Lewis committed during a robbery in th

Mr. Justice Hernández Matos delivered the opinion of the Court. Alejandro Dumas Márquez was charged with assault to commit murder in the Superior Court, San Juan Part. He pleaded not guilty and requested trial by jury. After the trial, the jury rendered a unanimous verdict of guilty. Defendant filed a written motion requesting that the former trial and verdict be set aside and a new trial be granted. Said motio

[EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 74 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 75 [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT