Fifth Amendment Grand Jury Clause

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

• United States v. Sears
  719 F.2d 1386· 9th Cir.· 1983-09-19 ·cited 53×
  The court held that the majority's reliance solely on a constitutional rationale for reversing the dismissal of the indictment obscures the distinct analytical ground of a court's supervisory power.
• United States v. Castro
  776 F.2d 1118· 3d Cir.· 1985-11-12 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the variance between the indictment and the evidence did not violate the Fifth Amendment's grand jury clause, the evidence was sufficient to convict Garcia-Remedio and Suarez, and the trial court's jury instructions adequately presented Castro's entrapment def
• United States v. Zingaro
  858 F.2d 94· 2d Cir.· 1988-09-21 ·cited 24×
  The court held that admitting evidence of a loan not specified in the indictment, without a limiting instruction, impermissibly broadened the charges against the defendant, constituting a constructive amendment of the indictment.
• Barkman v. Sanford
  162 F.2d 592· 5th Cir.· 1947-06-24 ·cited 24×
  A defendant can waive the right to indictment by a grand jury for an infamous crime, as this right is a personal privilege, not a jurisdictional limitation.
• United States v. Hon. Judge Almeric L. Christian
  660 F.2d 892· 3d Cir.· 1981-09-30 ·cited 20×
  The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, specifically Rules 6 and 7, do not authorize the convening of an investigatory grand jury in the Virgin Islands, and even if they did, the government failed to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to a writ of mandamus.
• Ivory Lee Robinson v. State
  215 So. 3d 1262· Fla. 1st DCA· 2017-04-04 ·cited 10×
  Robinson appeals the denial of his Rule 3.800(a) motion challenging a 25-year mandatory minimum sentence under Florida's 10-20-Life law. He argues the amended information failed to allege 'great bodily harm' as required by Apprendi v. New Jersey, raising both technical and substa
• United States v. Patino
  962 F.2d 263· 2d Cir.· 1992-05-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a conspiracy to kidnap qualifies as a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1), and that the prosecutor's summation did not impermissibly amend the indictment.
• United States v. Schlesinger
  598 F.2d 722· 2d Cir.· 1979-04-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment was valid on its face and that the trial judge's jury instructions, while not perfect, did not constitute reversible error given the circumstances and overwhelming evidence.
• United States v. Lawton
  995 F.2d 290· D.C. Cir.· 1993-06-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the jury instructions impermissibly broadened the indictment, allowing conviction for conduct not charged, thus constituting plain error requiring reversal.
• United States v. Roshko
  969 F.2d 1· 2d Cir.· 1992-07-17 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment was constructively amended at trial and that the prosecution was barred by the statute of limitations because the conspiracy terminated when the primary object, Meir's green card, was obtained.
• United States v. Olson
  925 F.2d 1170· 9th Cir.· 1991-02-12 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must show prejudice, and that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of aiding and abetting mail fraud.
• United States v. Fisher
  871 F.2d 444· 3d Cir.· 1989-03-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court's order denying motions to dismiss indictments based on alleged prosecutorial misconduct is not immediately appealable under the collateral order doctrine because such claims are effectively reviewable after a final judgment.