Duplicity In Indictment

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

• United States v. Canas
  595 F.2d 73· 1st Cir.· 1979-04-05 ·cited 13×
  The court held that prosecutorial misconduct, duplicity in the indictment, and jury instructions did not warrant reversal of the convictions.
• United States v. Droms
  566 F.2d 361· 2d Cir.· 1977-02-25 ·cited 13×
• United States v. Hager
  969 F.2d 883· 10th Cir.· 1992-07-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the search warrant was supported by probable cause, the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, and the jury instructions were proper. The court also found that the defendant waived his challenge to the duplicitous nature of the indictment.
• United States v. Herbert
  502 F.2d 890· 10th Cir.· 1974-08-14 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to require the government to identify its informant, nor in denying the motion to suppress evidence, and that the indictment and trial were proper.
• United States v. LaBARBERA
  463 F.2d 988· 7th Cir.· 1972-06-08 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying motions to dismiss the indictment, limiting cross-examination of a witness for safety reasons, or denying requests for competency examinations, and that the evidence was sufficient for conviction.
• United States v. Harbin
  377 F.2d 78· 4th Cir.· 1967-04-07 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appellant's contentions regarding speedy trial, entrapment, and duplicity lacked merit.
• Hanf v. United States
  235 F.2d 710· 8th Cir.· 1956-07-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently charged offenses, the motions to dismiss were untimely, and the Federal Alcohol Administration Act constitutionally applies to intrastate liquor sales that affect interstate commerce or revenue.
• Newton v. United States
  162 F.2d 795· 4th Cir.· 1947-07-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the venue was proper, the indictment was sufficient, the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion, and the jury charge was accurate.
• Leche v. United States
  118 F.2d 246· 5th Cir.· 1941-03-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous and that the trial court did not err in its instructions regarding state law or witness examination.
• United States v. Davis
  730 F.2d 669· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-23 ·cited 11×
  The court held that listing property not owned as an asset constitutes a false statement, not a willful overvaluation under 18 U.S.C. § 1014, and that separate submissions of false information for loan applications constitute separate offenses.
• United States v. Waldeck
  909 F.2d 555· 1st Cir.· 1990-07-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous, the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for tax evasion, and the jury instructions were not erroneous.
• United States v. Donnie G. Brunson
  882 F.2d 151· 5th Cir.· 1989-08-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently charged an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 215 and the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, but the district court erred in applying the incorrect sentencing guideline.
• United States v. Fnu Hicks
  529 F.2d 841· 5th Cir.· 1976-04-05 ·cited 10×
  A defendant can be convicted of conspiring to dispense controlled substances even if they are not a medical practitioner, as long as they knowingly participated in the conspiracy with a practitioner.
• Perkins v. United States
  526 F.2d 688· 5th Cir.· 1976-01-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous and that the appellant received effective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Romero
  484 F.2d 1324· 10th Cir.· 1973-10-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the seizure of the sawed-off shotgun was proper under the Fourth Amendment due to the dangerous circumstances and the deputies' recognition of the weapon, and that the indictment was not duplicitous.
• United States v. Gaus
  471 F.2d 495· 7th Cir.· 1973-01-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant waived the issue of duplicity in the indictment by failing to raise it before trial, and that the admission of similar offenses evidence, despite potential issues with allocation and quantity, did not constitute reversible error given the clear p
• United States v. Frank
  290 F.2d 195· 3d Cir.· 1961-05-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for conspiracy under the Mann Act was valid, as the indictment was not defective and the evidence presented was sufficient.
• Hughes v. State
  103 So. 2d 207· Fla. 2d DCA· 1958-04-30 ·cited 10×
  D.R. Hughes was convicted of 16 counts of grand larceny for presenting forged fruit purchase contracts to his employer, Adams Packing Association, Inc., resulting in over $100,000 in fraudulent payments. On appeal, Hughes challenged the propriety of the trial court's denial of mo
• Empire OIL & GAS Corp. v. United States
  136 F.2d 868· 9th Cir.· 1943-06-28 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court committed prejudicial error by unduly limiting the testimony of an expert witness regarding the efficacy of the defendants' drug products.
• United States v. Emile Mitchell Robin
  693 F.2d 376· 5th Cir.· 1982-11-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous and that the admission of certain testimony was harmless error, affirming the conviction.
• United States v. Efren Cortes
  606 F.2d 511· 5th Cir.· 1979-10-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a defendant is not entitled to force the government to elect between charges of possession with intent to distribute and actual distribution when both arise from a single transaction and concurrent sentences are imposed.
• Chee v. United States
  449 F.2d 747· 9th Cir.· 1971-09-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a claim of systematic exclusion of a racial group from jury rolls can be raised in a Section 2255 motion, and the petitioner's allegations were sufficient to require a hearing.
• Pino v. United States
  370 F.2d 247· D.C. Cir.· 1966-12-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient to confer jurisdiction and that the trial court did not err in its handling of the indictment.
• Joyner v. United States
  320 F.2d 798· D.C. Cir.· 1963-06-20 ·cited 8×
  A conviction for assault with intent to commit robbery is permissible even if not all forms of robbery charged necessarily include assault, provided the facts proven support the lesser offense.
• United States v. Lembo
  184 F.2d 411· 3d Cir.· 1950-09-19 ·cited 8×
  The indictment must be dismissed because it is incomprehensible and fails to fairly apprise the defendant of the charges against him.
• Stewart v. United States
  131 F.2d 624· 5th Cir.· 1942-12-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous, improperly admitted evidence was not considered due to lack of stated grounds, and conviction was proper despite uncorroborated coconspirator testimony.
• United States v. Razo-Leora
  961 F.2d 1140· 5th Cir.· 1992-05-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions of both defendants and that the restitution award and jury instructions were not erroneous.
• United States v. Huguenin
  950 F.2d 23· 1st Cir.· 1991-11-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous, the competency examination was properly ordered despite defendant's objections, and any procedural irregularities in the competency determination or the provision of jury tax information were harmless error.
• United States v. Morrow
  717 F.2d 800· 3d Cir.· 1983-09-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for conspiracy to violate 18 U.S.C. § 844(h) and that the indictment was not duplicitous.
• United States v. Wright
  704 F.2d 420· 8th Cir.· 1983-04-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a search warrant for a residence and specific drugs authorizes the search of containers within the residence where those drugs could reasonably be found, and that evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for possession with intent to distribute.
• United States v. Bowline
  593 F.2d 944· 10th Cir.· 1979-03-08 ·cited 6×
  The Double Jeopardy Clause bars retrial of defendants on a conspiracy count when the trial court dismisses the count based on the insufficiency of the government's evidence presented during trial.
• United States v. Farinas
  448 F.2d 1334· 2d Cir.· 1971-09-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the regulation requiring registrants to obey orders at induction centers is constitutional as applied, and that the admission of evidence regarding conduct in Room 206 was proper.
• United States v. Catalano
  439 F.2d 1100· 2d Cir.· 1971-03-17 ·cited 6×
  Inconsistent jury verdicts do not automatically require reversal, and the indictment was not duplicitous.
• Garnett v. United States
  404 F.2d 26· 5th Cir.· 1968-11-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment count was not duplicitous and that the guilty pleas were voluntary. The convictions are affirmed.
• Williamson v. State
  155 Fla. 477· Fla.· 1945-01-23 ·cited 6×
  William Claude Williamson was convicted of hit-and-run driving under a single indictment charging both the infliction of injury and leaving the scene without assistance. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction despite his arguments that the indictment was duplicitous an
• Aldrich v. State
  123 Fla. 352· Fla.· 1936-03-30 ·cited 6×
  Arthur Aldrich, Jr. was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to twenty years imprisonment. The Florida Supreme Court reversed his conviction because the indictment was fatally defective under the precedent of Croft v. State, charging robbery in the alternative and failing to
• United States v. Aracri
  968 F.2d 1512· 2d Cir.· 1992-06-30 ·cited 5×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy and tax fraud, but remanded for consideration of potential Giglio violations regarding undisclosed impeachment material.
• United States v. Cooper
  966 F.2d 936· 5th Cir.· 1992-07-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a conspiracy charge alleging multiple objects is not duplicitous, and that the maintenance of a crack house constitutes a separate offense each day it is continued.
• United States v. Hawkes
  753 F.2d 355· 4th Cir.· 1985-01-29 ·cited 4×
  The court should affirm Sylvia Hawkes' conviction because the evidence supports a jury instruction on intentional flight as reflecting consciousness of guilt.
• United States v. Drury
  687 F.2d 63· 5th Cir.· 1982-09-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's conviction for mail fraud was not erroneous, as the evidence supported a scheme to defraud clients by breaching fiduciary duties through undisclosed kickbacks, even if insurance companies were not defrauded.
• Dunning v. State
  83 So. 2d 702· Fla.· 1955-11-09 ·cited 4×
  Dunning was convicted of manslaughter resulting from reckless operation of an automobile while intoxicated. He appealed, arguing that the trial court failed to instruct the jury that the State had to prove both culpable negligence and intoxication beyond a reasonable doubt, but t
• Colquette v. United States
  216 F.2d 591· 7th Cir.· 1954-11-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the indictment, despite omitting a specific subsection number, sufficiently charged a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and was not duplicitous.
• Nolen v. United States
  190 F.2d 418· 6th Cir.· 1951-07-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellants' conviction for aggravated bank robbery was supported by sufficient evidence and that their legal arguments on appeal lacked merit.
• Scott v. State
  87 Fla. 12· Fla.· 1924-01-10 ·cited 4×
  This case reviews a conviction for offering a bribe to a police officer. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding the indictment sufficient and the evidence adequate to support the guilty verdict.
• United States v. Pulido
  133 F.4th 1256· 11th Cir.· 2025-04-08 ·cited 3×
  Jordan Pulido and his father Roberto Jimenez were convicted of multiple federal crimes for enticing, trafficking, and sexually exploiting a 14-year-old Croatian girl through a prolonged online and in-person relationship spanning ten months, with Jimenez providing financial suppor
• United States v. Stickle
  355 F. Supp. 2d 1317· S.D. Fla.· 2004-10-06 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the defendants failed to demonstrate a substantial imbalance of inconvenience to warrant transferring the case, and that the indictment sufficiently alleged venue and did not contain fatal duplicity.
• Lew Kay v. State
  114 Fla. 44· Fla.· 1934-02-21 ·cited 3×
  Lew Kay was convicted of manslaughter in Pinellas County Circuit Court. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting Kay's challenges to the denial of a venue change and the indictment's alleged duplicity.
• United States v. Parker
  991 F.2d 1493· 9th Cir.· 1993-04-20 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding no reversible error in the trial court's rulings or jury instructions.
• United States v. Kussmaul
  987 F.2d 345· 6th Cir.· 1993-02-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court erred in applying a cross-reference provision in the sentencing guidelines because the offense of conviction did not involve the sexual exploitation of a minor.
• United States v. Conlon
  661 F.2d 235· D.C. Cir.· 1981-08-13 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the jury instructions were proper and did not amend the indictment, and there was no prosecutorial misconduct.