Federal Rule Of Criminal Procedure 31(C)

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

• United States v. Johnson
  637 F.2d 1224· 9th Cir.· 1980-08-29 ·cited 85×
  The court held that the trial court committed reversible error by refusing to instruct the jury on lesser included offenses, adopting the 'inherent relationship' test for identifying such offenses.
• United States v. Brown
  761 F.2d 1272· 9th Cir.· 1985-01-29 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the wiretaps were lawfully authorized, the defendant waived his Speedy Trial Act claim, jury inconsistency between facilitation and underlying charges is permissible, and the defendant was not entitled to lesser-included offense instructions.
• United States v. Coppola
  526 F.2d 764· 10th Cir.· 1975-12-08 ·cited 48×
  The court held that hearsay statements of a co-defendant, when adopted by the defendant, are admissible as party admissions, and that evidence of other crimes is admissible to prove motive.
• United States v. Ciongoli
  358 F.2d 439· 3d Cir.· 1966-03-23 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the indictment should not have been dismissed because the defendant could be convicted of a lesser included offense, and the issue of market value for blank money orders was a question of proof for trial.
• Larson v. United States
  296 F.2d 80· 10th Cir.· 1961-11-14 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the failure to instruct the jury on a lesser included offense, when supported by evidence, constitutes reversible error.
• United States v. Brewster
  506 F.2d 62· D.C. Cir.· 1974-08-02 ·cited 39×
  A conviction under the illegal gratuity statute (18 U.S.C. § 201(g)) can be sustained as a lesser included offense of bribery (18 U.S.C. § 201(c)(1)), but the trial judge's instructions failed to adequately distinguish between the offenses.
• United States v. Vito LoRUSSO and Joseph Errante
  695 F.2d 45· 2d Cir.· 1982-12-02 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the trial court had the authority to submit a lesser-included offense to the jury even after granting a motion for acquittal on the greater offense, and that doing so did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause. The court also found sufficient evidence to suppo
• United States v. Crutchfield
  547 F.2d 496· 9th Cir.· 1977-01-05 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of giving a gratuity to a public official, as the evidence presented a disputed factual element regarding specific intent.
• United States v. Cady
  495 F.2d 742· 8th Cir.· 1974-04-19 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the jury instructions were not plain error, and the refusal to give a lesser included offense instruction was proper.
• United States v. Horn
  946 F.2d 738· 10th Cir.· 1991-10-09 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, that a lesser included offense instruction was not warranted, and that the Sentencing Guidelines do not violate due process.
• Crosby v. United States
  339 F.2d 743· D.C. Cir.· 1964-11-25 ·cited 24×
  The court held that a conviction for an offense not necessarily included in the offense charged in the indictment is a jurisdictional defect that cannot be waived by the defendant's failure to object to the jury charge.
• United States v. Browner
  889 F.2d 549· 5th Cir.· 1989-11-16 ·cited 22×
  A defendant is entitled to a jury instruction on involuntary manslaughter as a lesser included offense of voluntary manslaughter if the evidence could rationally support a finding of guilt for the lesser offense and acquittal for the greater.
• DeMARRIAS v. United States
  487 F.2d 19· 8th Cir.· 1973-09-25 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the petitioner's post-conviction petition was properly dismissed, affirming the district court's denial of relief.
• United States v. Dennison
  937 F.2d 559· 10th Cir.· 1991-07-01 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of serious bodily injury, the jury instructions adequately covered the defendant's mental state defense, and the district court did not err in refusing lesser included offense instructions or denying a reduction
• United States v. Methvin
  441 F.2d 584· 5th Cir.· 1971-04-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a lesser-included offense instruction was proper even when the defendant complains about it, if there is a disputed issue of fact regarding an element of the greater offense.
• United States v. Williams
  775 F.2d 1295· 5th Cir.· 1985-11-05 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the district court exceeded statutory limits by imposing a life sentence without a jury recommendation, and that the jury instructions on flight were proper.
• Chaifetz v. United States
  288 F.2d 133· D.C. Cir.· 1960-11-10 ·cited 17×
  A defendant cannot be convicted of a lesser included offense if that offense is barred by the statute of limitations, even if the greater offense is not barred.
• 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.
• United States v. Whitlock
  663 F.2d 1094· D.C. Cir.· 1980-12-04 ·cited 16×
  A bank officer or employee commits embezzlement if they have control over entrusted funds by virtue of their position of trust, even if they did not have prior lawful possession or obtained access through an unauthorized act.
• United States v. Ferreira
  625 F.2d 1030· 1st Cir.· 1980-07-22 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court did not err in instructing the jury on the lesser included offense of unarmed bank robbery, nor in denying the defendant's motion to dismiss for alleged failure to provide Jencks Act material and exculpatory evidence.
• Bearden v. United States
  304 F.2d 532· 5th Cir.· 1962-06-14 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the conviction must be reversed due to fundamental errors in jury instructions and the prejudicial mention of a new statute, and that the court should not proceed without affording the indigent appellant the right to oral argument.
• MacILLRATH v. United States
  188 F.2d 1009· D.C. Cir.· 1951-03-22 ·cited 16×
  Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 31(c) does not require a lesser offense instruction if there is no evidence to support it.
• United States v. Komisaruk
  885 F.2d 490· 9th Cir.· 1989-05-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court did not err in precluding evidence of international law, necessity, or crime prevention as defenses to the charge of willfully damaging government property, nor in refusing a jury instruction on trespass as a lesser included offense.
• United States v. Rein
  848 F.2d 777· 7th Cir.· 1988-06-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the defendant's statutory and constitutional speedy trial rights were not violated, the admission of his prior conviction was within the trial court's discretion, and the jury instruction on the lesser included offense was appropriate.
• United States v. Schmuck
  840 F.2d 384· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the defendant's requested lesser included offense instruction on odometer tampering.
• Gov't OF the Virgin Islands v. Joseph
  765 F.2d 394· 3d Cir.· 1985-06-21 ·cited 14×
  A conviction for an offense not charged in the information, even if a lesser included offense under some tests, must be overturned if it requires proof of an element not present in the charged offense, violating the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to be informed of the charges.
• United States v. Bishop
  455 F.2d 612· 9th Cir.· 1972-02-11 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on 26 U.S.C. § 7207 as a lesser included offense of 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1).
• Ailsworth v. United States
  448 F.2d 439· 9th Cir.· 1971-09-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the introduction of an oral statement, while in violation of Miranda, did not constitute reversible error under the unusual facts of the case, and the appellant's guilt of felony theft was conclusively demonstrated.
• United States v. Cooper
  812 F.2d 1283· 10th Cir.· 1987-02-27 ·cited 12×
  The court held that giving lesser included offense instructions based solely on the 'inherent relationship' test over the defendant's objection violates due process.
• United States v. Lani M. Brozyna
  571 F.2d 742· 2d Cir.· 1978-02-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the indictment's charge of "acquisition" of a firearm encompassed "attempted acquisition," and thus there was no fatal variance between the indictment and the proof. The court also held that the denial of severance was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Scharf
  558 F.2d 498· 8th Cir.· 1977-07-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of altered records, summary exhibits, or in refusing lesser included offense instructions, and that the sentences imposed were not excessive.
• LEE v. United States
  238 F.2d 341· 9th Cir.· 1956-10-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the appeal from the order regarding costs was invalid because the order had no effect and was not reviewable on the timely appeal from the judgment. The court also found no merit in the other specifications of error.
• United States v. Wade
  502 F.2d 144· 6th Cir.· 1974-08-27 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the case must be remanded for an evidentiary hearing to determine if the defense counsel was misled by a court law clerk regarding jury instructions on lesser included offenses.
• United States v. Dennis
  26 F.4th 922· 11th Cir.· 2022-02-16 ·cited 9×
  A probationer is entitled to written notice of claimed violations, but this notice need not explicitly identify lesser included offenses if the greater offense is adequately identified.
• United States v. McGILL
  964 F.2d 222· 3d Cir.· 1992-05-13 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant's deposit of funds subject to IRS levy into a personal account, while under criminal investigation for tax evasion, could constitute an affirmative act of evasion under 26 U.S.C. § 7201.
• United States v. Muldoon
  931 F.2d 282· 4th Cir.· 1991-04-30 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the wiretap evidence was properly admitted, the voir dire was adequate, the evidence supported a bribery conviction, and the sentencing was appropriate.
• United States v. Norfleet Lee Carter
  540 F.2d 753· 4th Cir.· 1976-09-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of bank larceny when the evidence presented a disputed factual issue regarding the use of force or intimidation.
• United States v. Sotelo-Rivera
  906 F.2d 1324· 9th Cir.· 1990-06-26 ·cited 6×
  A lesser-included offense instruction is not necessary if the evidence establishing guilt of the greater offense also necessarily establishes guilt of the lesser offense.
• Britton v. United States
  301 F.2d 531· D.C. Cir.· 1962-04-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit reversible error by refusing a request for a lesser included offense instruction when the request was made late and lacked specificity.
• United States v. Howard
  991 F.2d 195· 5th Cir.· 1993-05-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the statute was constitutional, the defendant was properly classified as a career offender, and the denial of the motion to suppress was correct.
• United States v. White
  972 F.2d 590· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a defendant is entitled to a lesser-included offense instruction if there is any evidence, however weak, that rationally supports acquittal on the greater offense and conviction on the lesser.
• United States v. Browner
  937 F.2d 165· 5th Cir.· 1991-07-23 ·cited 4×
  Assault with a dangerous weapon is not a lesser included offense of voluntary manslaughter under the strict statutory elements test adopted by the Supreme Court in Schmuck v. United States.
• Bagby v. Sowders
  894 F.2d 792· 6th Cir.· 1990-01-17 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence did not warrant an instruction on the lesser included offense of sexual abuse in the first degree.
• United States v. Harley
  990 F.2d 1340· D.C. Cir.· 1993-04-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant waived his right to challenge the suppression ruling by failing to object below, and that the admission of expert testimony was not an abuse of discretion or plain error. The court also affirmed that a lesser included offense does not require a l
• United States v. Guyon
  717 F.2d 1536· 6th Cir.· 1983-09-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court's failure to instruct the jury on a lesser-included offense was error, and this error was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• O'Guin v. Foltz
  715 F.2d 397· 6th Cir.· 1983-09-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the petitioner's claims lacked merit and affirmed the denial of habeas corpus relief.
• United States v. Carroll Blackwell
  515 F.2d 125· 4th Cir.· 1975-04-23 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a defendant can be tried and convicted of a lesser included offense, even if the principal pleaded guilty to that lesser offense.
• Eltesa Williams v. Turner
  421 F.2d 168· 10th Cir.· 1970-02-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a plea of guilty to obtaining money by false pretenses is void if the defendant was only charged with forgery, as the former is not a necessarily included offense of the latter under Utah law.
• United States v. Windsor
  981 F.2d 943· 7th Cir.· 1992-12-09 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the trial court did not commit plain error by failing to instruct the jury on a lesser included offense, nor was there ineffective assistance of counsel or an abuse of discretion in denying a continuance.
• United States v. Walkingeagle
  974 F.2d 551· 4th Cir.· 1992-09-08
  The court held that the district court retained jurisdiction over a lesser-included offense even after granting a judgment of acquittal on the greater felony counts.