MCKEEVER

v.

BLOCK ET AL.

Citator

Cited By

• Bedoya v. State, 634 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
  …duty; that is he did not act “willfully”, and that essential part of the offense would not be established. The instruction requested by defense counsel was drawn from United States v. Anderson, 872 F. 2d 1508, 1518 n. 14 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1004, 110 S.Ct. 566, 107 L.Ed.2d 560 (1989). Anderson claimed he mistakenly believed that he was selling firearms and explosives to a CIA agent for a covert operation. According to Anderson, if this mistake of fact were true, the sale of the munitions w…
• United States v. Veltmann, 6 F.3d 1483 (11th Cir. 1993)
  …S. 44, 52, 107 S.Ct. 2704, 2709, 97 L.Ed.2d 37 (1987). The Engstrom deposition, they say, provided Elizabeth’s motive for self-destruction. The government’s response rests on United States v. Anderson, 872 F. 2d 1508 (11th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1004, 110 S.Ct. 566, 107 L.Ed.2d 560 (1989). In Anderson, the Court instructed that the right to present a defense is subject to compliance with the rules of evidence. Id. at 1519. Because we hold that Engstrom’s deposition contained state of mind evi…
• United States v. Quinones, 97 F.3d 473 (11th Cir. 1996)
  …r a multicount indictment. See United States v. Alvarez-Moreno, 874 F. 2d 1402, 1414 (11th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1032, 110 S.Ct. 1484, 108 L.Ed.2d 620 (1990); United States v. Anderson, 872 F. 2d 1508, 1520-21 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1004, 110 S.Ct. 566, 107 L.Ed.2d 560 (1989); United States v. Lail, 814 F. 2d 1529, 1530 (11th Cir.1987). See also United States v. Cochran, 883 F. 2d 1012, 1015 n. 6 (11th Cir.1989). We therefore conclude that vacation of the sentence on Count Two wil…