Duplicity In Indictment

214 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• In re Ulysses Cannon
  931 F.3d 1236· 11th Cir.· 2019-07-25 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a motion for leave to file a successive motion is granted as to one conviction and denied as to two others, based on the prima facie showing of statutory criteria.
• 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. Leon
  679 F.2d 534· 5th Cir.· 1982-07-02 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy and telephone use, but reversed one conviction due to a lack of jury instruction on that specific count.
• United States v. Grady Quicksey
  525 F.2d 337· 4th Cir.· 1975-07-25 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy to violate the Travel Act for some defendants, vacated others, and remanded for resentencing or new trial based on the specific facts and jury findings.
• Reno v. United States
  317 F.2d 499· 5th Cir.· 1963-05-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient to charge conspiracy and that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to dismiss.
• United States v. Galgano
  281 F.2d 908· 2d Cir.· 1960-08-22 ·cited 26×
  The court held that an erroneous citation in an indictment does not preclude conviction under the correct statute, and objections to duplicity are waived if not raised before trial.
• United States v. Baron deHirsch Meyer
  266 F.2d 747· 5th Cir.· 1959-05-05 ·cited 26×
  The Court of Appeals held that the district court erred in dismissing the indictment counts. The dismissal of count one was procedural, and the substantive counts were not duplicitous as alleged.
• United States v. Burton
  871 F.2d 1566· 11th Cir.· 1989-05-05 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for embezzlement and conspiracy to embezzle, and that other alleged errors did not warrant reversal.
• United States v. Alsobrook
  620 F.2d 139· 6th Cir.· 1980-05-22 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous and that the jury instruction regarding knowledge of interstate travel for aiding and abetting was sufficient, though it could have been clearer.
• United States v. Goodman
  285 F.2d 378· 5th Cir.· 1960-12-23 ·cited 24×
  The court held that dismissal of the entire indictment was improper, as lesser remedies like ordering an election or separate trials, or striking surplusage, were available for the alleged defects.
• Korholz v. United States
  269 F.2d 897· 10th Cir.· 1959-08-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous, the evidence was sufficient to establish the elements of the statutory offense, and the trial court did not err in its rulings on evidence or jury instructions.
• United States v. Ansani
  240 F.2d 216· 7th Cir.· 1957-01-15 ·cited 24×
  The court held that 'trade boosters' are essential parts of gambling devices under the Johnson Act and that the registration requirements of the Act do not violate the Fifth Amendment. The court also affirmed the trial court's rulings on procedural matters.
• Burton v. United States
  175 F.2d 960· 5th Cir.· 1949-07-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the indictment was not vague or duplicitous, and that the trial court did not err in denying continuances, restricting cross-examination, excluding certain testimony, or in its jury charge.
• Frankfort Distilleries, Inc. v. United States
  144 F.2d 824· 10th Cir.· 1944-11-13 ·cited 22×
  The indictments were insufficient because they failed to allege the time, place, and circumstances of the unlawful agreement with sufficient particularity, making it difficult for defendants to prepare a defense.
• United States v. N.Y. Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., Inc.
  137 F.2d 459· 5th Cir.· 1943-07-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that while some allegations in the indictment were inflammatory, dismissal was premature, and the indictment sufficiently alleged venue and conspiracy. However, it was fatally defective as to two defendants due to a lack of factual allegations connecting them to th
• United States v. Baytank (Houston), Inc.
  934 F.2d 599· 5th Cir.· 1991-06-13 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed Baytank's RCRA convictions, granted the government's mandamus petition for special assessments, and reversed/affirmed parts of the government's appeal regarding other defendants and counts.
• United States v. White
  879 F.2d 1509· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-18 ·cited 20×
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to convict Judith White of bankruptcy fraud due to lack of proof she knew the contents of the petition, but sufficient evidence existed for Richard White. The court also remanded Richard White's case to determine if the governme
• United States v. Shorter
  809 F.2d 54· D.C. Cir.· 1987-01-16 ·cited 20×
  The court held that tax evasion over multiple years can be charged as a single offense if part of a continuing scheme, and that expert testimony on pathological gambling was properly excluded as irrelevant or unnecessary.
• United States v. Thomas
  774 F.2d 807· 7th Cir.· 1985-10-04 ·cited 20×
  The court affirmed the convictions of both defendants, finding no reversible error in the admission of co-defendant testimony, speedy trial calculations, or sufficiency of evidence, but remanded for correction of a clerical error in sentencing.
• United States v. Laverick
  348 F.2d 708· 3d Cir.· 1965-07-15 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court's jury instructions on entrapment were sufficient and that the defendants' arguments regarding the indictment and cross-examination were without merit.
• United States v. MacALPINE
  129 F.2d 737· 7th Cir.· 1942-07-21 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous because the alleged separate schemes were merely different methods used to effectuate a single overarching scheme to defraud.
• Davis v. State
  46 Fla. 137· Fla.· 1903-06-01 ·cited 19×
  Charlie Davis was convicted of burglary with aggravating circumstances (breaking and entering with a dangerous weapon and assault) and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Florida Supreme Court reversed and awarded a new trial because the trial court erred in refusing to give a ju
• United States v. Alga Hope, Jr.
  861 F.2d 1574· 11th Cir.· 1988-12-27 ·cited 18×
  The court held that Count I of the indictment fails to state a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 because it alleges neither a direct nor indirect fraud on the United States, and affirming the district court's dismissal is appropriate.
• United States v. Browning, Inc.
  572 F.2d 720· 10th Cir.· 1978-03-14 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a Customs Service investigation constitutes a 'proceeding' under 18 U.S.C. § 1505 and that advising foreign manufacturers to misrepresent invoice prices violates the statute. The court also held that alleging multiple instances of false invoicing in a single c
• Callahan v. United States
  371 F.2d 658· 9th Cir.· 1967-01-17 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous and that the appellant's other assignments of error were without merit.
• Vaccaro v. United States
  296 F.2d 500· 5th Cir.· 1961-12-14 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the searches of the appellant and his vehicle were reasonable as incident to a lawful arrest, and the admission of evidence pertaining to a suitcase of marijuana found near the arrest location was permissible as circumstantial evidence.
• United States v. Acy Lennon
  246 F.2d 24· 2d Cir.· 1957-06-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for willfully attempting to evade income taxes by filing false returns was supported by sufficient evidence and that the trial proceedings were not unduly prejudicial.
• Hardy Joseph Owens and John Link Cogdill v. United States
  221 F.2d 351· 5th Cir.· 1955-04-15 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous and the proof did not show a material variance, affirming the convictions because any potential errors did not substantially prejudice the appellants.
• Witt v. United States
  196 F.2d 285· 9th Cir.· 1952-04-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its rulings regarding witness exclusion, confession admission, and jury instructions, and that any objection to the indictment's form was waived.
• United States v. Helmich
  704 F.2d 547· 11th Cir.· 1983-05-02 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the statute of limitations did not bar prosecution for conspiracy to commit espionage, and Wharton's Rule did not apply to the charges.
• Newman v. United States
  817 F.2d 635· 10th Cir.· 1987-04-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a fifteen-year sentence for a conspiracy conviction involving both narcotic and non-narcotic drugs, based on a general jury verdict, cannot stand due to sentencing ambiguity, and thus vacated the conviction and remanded for a new trial on that count.
• United States v. Morse
  785 F.2d 771· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-25 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous, there was no fatal variance between the indictment and the proof, the investments constituted securities, and the jury instructions adequately conveyed the requirement of unanimity on the single scheme.
• United States v. Acosta
  748 F.2d 577· 11th Cir.· 1984-12-10 ·cited 16×
  A jury verdict is invalid if the jury instructions allow for a non-unanimous verdict on different offenses, even if all jurors agree on the ultimate intent to defraud.
• Bashans v. State
  388 So. 2d 1303· Fla. 1st DCA· 1980-10-07 ·cited 16×
  Ronald Bashans was convicted by jury of sexual battery under a defective indictment that charged two separate and distinct offenses in a single count without specifying which one the jury found him guilty of. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new tr
• United States v. Ellis
  595 F.2d 154· 3d Cir.· 1979-03-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence of a conspiracy to violate civil rights, and that the trial court's jury instructions and rulings on prosecutorial misconduct were proper.
• United States v. Wyant
  576 F.2d 1312· 8th Cir.· 1978-05-30 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy and transportation/sale of stolen goods, and that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or jury instructions.
• United States v. Busard
  524 F.2d 72· 5th Cir.· 1975-12-05 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous, the admission of evidence concerning a prior arrest was harmless error, and the seized cocaine was properly admitted.
• United States v. Henry
  504 F.2d 1335· 10th Cir.· 1974-10-23 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the statute is constitutional, the search and seizure were lawful, and the indictment was not fatally defective. The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
• United States v. Bartemio
  547 F.2d 341· 7th Cir.· 1974-05-30 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for possession of stolen securities and aiding and abetting, that the securities were within the scope of 18 U.S.C. § 659, that the indictment was not duplicitous or multiplicitous, and that the prosecutor's c
• United States v. Untiedt
  493 F.2d 1056· 8th Cir.· 1974-03-21 ·cited 16×
  A defendant can be convicted as an aider and abettor even if the principal is not prosecuted, and the trial court did not err in restricting cross-examination regarding an informant's identity when that testimony would not have contributed to the defense.
• United States v. Holley
  942 F.2d 916· 5th Cir.· 1991-09-13 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court committed reversible error by failing to instruct the jury that it must unanimously agree on at least one specific false statement within each count of the indictment. The court also found the alleged false statements were material to the un
• Mitchell v. United States
  434 F.2d 230· 9th Cir.· 1970-11-17 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the defendant waived objections to the jury verdict's omission of a count and the indictment's duplicity by failing to raise them at trial. The court also found no merit in other assignments of error.
• Wooldridge v. State
  49 Fla. 137· Fla.· 1905-01-01 ·cited 15×
  Wooldridge was convicted of forging a school warrant in his capacity as county superintendent of public instruction. On appeal, the Florida Supreme Court upheld the conviction despite 56 assignments of error, holding that a school warrant could be the subject of forgery, handwrit
• United States v. MAL
  942 F.2d 682· 9th Cir.· 1991-08-21 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the jury instructions adequately conveyed the affirmative act requirement for tax evasion and that 26 U.S.C. § 7201 criminalizes a single offense of tax evasion, not separate offenses for evading assessment and payment.
• United States v. Milestone
  626 F.2d 264· 3d Cir.· 1980-06-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that deleting language from an indictment to conform to the prosecution's election of theories does not constitute an amendment requiring grand jury approval if the remaining language still states an offense and does not broaden the charges.
• United States v. Hamilton
  452 F.2d 472· 8th Cir.· 1971-12-20 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellants' claims of prosecutorial misconduct, insufficient evidence, and discovery errors lacked merit, and that the evidence of guilt was overwhelming.
• United States v. Battaglia
  432 F.2d 1115· 7th Cir.· 1970-10-02 ·cited 14×
• Nolan v. United States
  395 F.2d 283· 5th Cir.· 1968-05-20 ·cited 14×
  The admission of evidence concerning the defendant's application for a wagering tax stamp and his filing of tax returns constituted reversible error due to the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination.
• Martinez v. United States
  220 F.2d 740· 1st Cir.· 1955-03-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the offenses charged in counts 1 and 2 were distinct, and the defendant's guilty plea admitted guilt to all distinct offenses alleged in count 2, making the consecutive sentences permissible.
• United States v. Mailon Paul Wood
  780 F.2d 955· 11th Cir.· 1986-01-22 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the jury instructions for the substantive section 3631 counts were correct and that the evidence was sufficient to convict the appellants. The court also affirmed the denial of Deering's motions to dismiss charges as duplicitous or multiplicitous.