-
342 F.2d 167·
5th Cir.·
1965-01-26
·cited 268×
The court held that a United States Attorney's signature is essential to the validity of an indictment and that the decision to sign or withhold a signature is an executive discretionary power that courts cannot coerce.
-
916 F.2d 628·
11th Cir.·
1990-11-02
·cited 128×
The court held that jury instructions constructively amended the indictment on Count Three, violating the Fifth Amendment, but found sufficient evidence for the conspiracy charge. The court also held that a district court's informed decision not to depart downward from Sentencing
-
581 F.2d 305·
2d Cir.·
1978-06-30
·cited 114×
The court held that defendants could not raise the issue of insufficient evidence of cocaine on appeal after they had argued for a variance based on the presence of cocaine evidence at trial. The court also found the admission of a co-defendant's statement and recordings of conve
-
501 F.2d 943·
5th Cir.·
1974-09-20
·cited 90×
The court held that section 1001 does not apply to false statements made to the Federal Bureau of Investigation when those statements do not relate to a pecuniary claim against the government.
-
847 F.2d 956·
1st Cir.·
1988-05-24
·cited 60×
The court held that the amended indictment was not a substantive change violating Cincotti's Fifth Amendment rights, and that the Supreme Court's reversal of Turkette was reasonably foreseeable, thus not violating due process.
-
519 F.2d 765·
9th Cir.·
1975-06-26
·cited 60×
The court held that defendants' scienter regarding the federal nature of the offense was not required, escape from a state facility designated by the Attorney General constituted escape from federal custody, and evidence was properly admitted. The court affirmed the convictions.
-
715 F.2d 1348·
9th Cir.·
1983-09-13
·cited 50×
The court held that the district court erred by granting a continuance without making the explicit findings required by the Speedy Trial Act, thus violating the Act's 70-day limit.
-
483 F.2d 88·
3d Cir.·
1973-06-20
·cited 46×
The court held that a defendant convicted as an aider and abettor cannot be convicted if the named principal in the indictment has been acquitted of the substantive offense.
-
434 F.2d 494·
D.C. Cir.·
1970-06-11
·cited 42×
The court held that the defendants' challenges to the indictment and their claims of prejudice from joint trials were without merit, affirming their convictions.
-
434 F.3d 1234·
11th Cir.·
2006-01-04
·cited 40×
The United States appealed the district court's refusal to designate Steven Gibson as a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 based on the district court's misinterpretation of Blakely v. Washington and its progeny. The district court had concluded that Blakely prevented it from
-
450 F.2d 1201·
2d Cir.·
1971-10-27
·cited 40×
The court held that a variance between the indictment and proof was not fatal because the bill of particulars provided adequate notice and there was no risk of double jeopardy. It also held that the exclusion of certain statements as hearsay was proper and that the prosecutor's r
-
841 F.2d 667·
6th Cir.·
1988-02-26
·cited 31×
The second sentence of 18 U.S.C. App. § 1202, which increases penalties for recidivists, creates an offense whose elements must be charged in the indictment and proved at trial, not merely established at sentencing.
-
524 F.2d 644·
6th Cir.·
1975-10-24
·cited 26×
The court held that an amendment to a misdemeanor indictment by a bill of particulars, even if it corrects a material date, does not require automatic reversal if the defendant had prior notice and suffered no actual prejudice.
-
919 F.2d 969·
5th Cir.·
1990-12-13
·cited 24×
The court affirmed the conviction, finding that the defendant's objection to surplusage in the indictment was untimely.
-
812 F.2d 632·
10th Cir.·
1987-02-27
·cited 20×
The court held that the use of an information instead of an indictment did not violate the defendant's constitutional rights, but the prosecutor's remarks at sentencing breached the plea agreement.
-
615 F.2d 867·
9th Cir.·
1980-03-26
·cited 20×
The court held that lack of authorization or union benefit are not necessary elements of a crime under 29 U.S.C. § 501(c), but rather are relevant evidence for determining criminal intent.
-
174 So. 2d 73·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1965-04-13
·cited 20×
Henderson appealed the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief following his 1963 robbery conviction and 19-year sentence. The court reversed and remanded for a hearing on his claim that his court-appointed counsel failed to adequately represent him by refusing to discu
-
604 F.2d 569·
8th Cir.·
1979-08-16
·cited 18×
The court held that the defendant's actions in advising others on how to avoid federal income tax withholding were not protected by the First Amendment, an indictment was not required, and he was not illegally selectively prosecuted.
-
212 F.2d 761·
9th Cir.·
1954-02-26
·cited 18×
A conviction in the District Court of Guam for an offense punishable by imprisonment for over one year, prosecuted by information without a waiver of indictment, violates Rule 7(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, which is made applicable to Guam by statute. This defec
-
595 F.2d 551·
10th Cir.·
1979-03-29
·cited 16×
The dissenting judge believes the Double Jeopardy Clause was violated by the second prosecution of Huffman for the same act of theft.
-
628 F.2d 362·
5th Cir.·
1980-10-14
·cited 12×
The court held that the jury instructions did not amend the indictment and that the defendants had a duty to ensure the accuracy of purchaser information on Form 4473.
-
602 F.2d 1006·
1st Cir.·
1979-07-26
·cited 12×
The court held that the defendant's allegations regarding the indictment process, if true, raise novel and serious legal issues that warrant further review, and thus the denial of his motion to vacate sentence was improper without such review.
-
412 F.2d 625·
3d Cir.·
1969-06-18
·cited 12×
An indictment amended in matter of substance, changing the gravamen of the offense, is invalid without action by the grand jury that returned it, even if the defendant consents.
-
681 F.2d 973·
5th Cir.·
1982-08-04
·cited 10×
The court held that a superseding information can replace an indictment for a misdemeanor, and the defendant failed to establish selective prosecution or improper denial of a motion to suppress.
-
585 F.2d 374·
8th Cir.·
1978-10-23
·cited 10×
The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights were not violated by the appointment of standby counsel and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
-
870 F.2d 109·
3d Cir.·
1989-03-13
·cited 8×
The court held that the indictment sufficiently stated offenses for obstruction of justice and conspiracy to defraud the United States, and that the district court erred in dismissing these counts.
-
965 F.2d 906·
10th Cir.·
1992-05-28
·cited 6×
The court held that the government's conduct was not so outrageous as to violate due process, the district court's clarification of 'fronting' did not constructively amend the indictment, and the court correctly determined it lacked discretion to depart below the statutory minimu
-
809 F.2d 1044·
4th Cir.·
1987-01-30
·cited 6×
An indictment is not rendered invalid by referring to 'divers other persons' as co-conspirators rather than naming them, as long as it sufficiently apprises the defendant of the charges and allows for a double jeopardy defense.
-
920 F.2d 1114·
2d Cir.·
1990-12-11
·cited 4×
The court held that state officials are immune from suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for actions taken in their judicial or prosecutorial capacities, even if those actions were erroneous or exceeded authority, as long as they did not act in the clear absence of all jurisdiction.
-
445 F.2d 622·
5th Cir.·
1971-07-06
·cited 4×
The court held that the failure of court-appointed counsel to advise the appellant of his appellate rights and to act to preserve those rights constituted an effective denial of constitutionally protected rights.
-
995 So. 2d 1008·
Fla. 1st DCA·
2008-10-24
·cited 2×
Valencia Byrd appealed her conviction and sentence following a guilty plea to armed burglary, attempted armed robbery, and second-degree murder. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, rejecting Byrd's arguments that her Fifth Amendment rights were violated by the absence
-
919 F.2d 266·
5th Cir.·
1990-11-29
·cited 2×
A United States magistrate does not have jurisdiction to revoke a defendant's supervised release, as statutory provisions do not grant this authority.
-
S.D. Fla.·
2023-04-07
The court held that the defendant's removal of state criminal prosecutions to federal court was untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 1455 and did not meet the requirements for removal under the civil rights statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1443.
-
973 F.2d 272·
4th Cir.·
1992-08-17
The court held that an indictment must charge each essential element of the offense, and a statutory citation alone is insufficient to cure a failure to do so. The court reversed the conviction under 26 U.S.C.A. § 5861(e) because the indictment failed to allege all essential elem
-
877 F.2d 341·
5th Cir.·
1989-06-30
The court held that jury instructions impermissibly broadened the scope of the indictment, allowing conviction for acts not charged.
-
662 F.2d 567·
9th Cir.·
1981-11-23
The court held that the defendant's conviction for statutory rape did not violate due process because he had actual notice of the charge and the lesser offense was necessarily included within the greater offense charged.
-
549 F.2d 1286·
9th Cir.·
1977-02-01
A knowing, voluntary, and intelligent guilty plea, made with counsel present and after being fully apprised of rights including potential YCA sentencing, constitutes a waiver of the right to indictment.