Grand Jury Indictment Requirement

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

• United States v. Kenny
  462 F.2d 1205· 3d Cir.· 1972-05-22 ·cited 139×
  The court held that the indictment was not vague, duplicitous, or fatally varied, and that the joinder of offenses and defendants was proper, affirming the convictions.
• Donaldson v. The Honorable Martin Sack
  265 So. 2d 499· Fla.· 1972-07-17 ·cited 110×
  Following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Furman v. Georgia invalidating capital punishment as then legislated, the Florida Supreme Court determined that Florida no longer has 'capital cases' or 'capital offenses' under its constitution and statutes. The court held that juri
• Jackson v. United States
  359 F.2d 260· D.C. Cir.· 1966-04-05 ·cited 58×
  The conviction should not stand because the indictment charged robbery by 'force and violence and against resistance and by putting in fear,' but the proof and jury instructions concerned robbery by 'sudden or stealthy seizure or snatching,' a different statutory basis.
• Watson v. Jago
  558 F.2d 330· 6th Cir.· 1977-06-14 ·cited 54×
  The court held that forcing a defendant to defend against a felony-murder charge, not included in the indictment, constitutes a constructive amendment that violates due process under the Fourteenth Amendment, even in a state court trial.
• James v. Reese
  546 F.2d 325· 9th Cir.· 1976-12-10 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed the district court's dismissal of the habeas corpus petition because the petitioner failed to exhaust available state remedies for all claims raised.
• United States v. Justina Lowe
  654 F.2d 562· 9th Cir.· 1981-08-24 ·cited 33×
  The court held that a probation restriction prohibiting approaching a submarine base infringes on fundamental constitutional rights of freedom of speech and assembly.
• United States v. Payton
  363 F.2d 996· 2d Cir.· 1966-07-26 ·cited 33×
  The court held that an indictment based on hearsay testimony presented as fact without disclosure to the grand jury violates the Fifth Amendment's grand jury guarantee.
• United States v. Lang
  644 F.2d 1232· 7th Cir.· 1981-04-02 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the replacement of grand jurors did not violate Rule 6 or the Fifth Amendment, and that rereading original jury instructions was proper.
• United States v. Harrison P. Cronic
  675 F.2d 1126· 10th Cir.· 1982-04-19 ·cited 28×
  The court held that Cronic was denied effective assistance of counsel due to his attorney's lack of experience and insufficient preparation time, requiring reversal of his conviction.
• Donald v. State
  31 Fla. 255· Fla.· 1893-01-01 ·cited 26×
  Tom Donald was convicted of first-degree murder based on an indictment found by only eight of twelve grand jurors under an 1891 Florida statute. The Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding that the constitutional guarantee of grand jury indictment for capital crimes requires the
• United States v. Pupo
  841 F.2d 1235· 4th Cir.· 1988-03-10 ·cited 22×
  A conviction under an indictment that fails to allege an essential element of the offense, specifically scienter, is invalid if the objection is raised before verdict. Newly discovered evidence that is merely cumulative does not warrant a new trial.
• United States v. Prejean
  494 F.2d 495· 5th Cir.· 1974-05-23 ·cited 22×
  A conviction under the Assimilative Crimes Act must be based on the offense charged in the indictment, and the evidence must prove all elements of that offense, including lack of consent for burglary.
• United States v. Ellsworth
  738 F.2d 333· 8th Cir.· 1984-07-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendants' convictions for willful failure to file income tax returns were not subject to reversal based on the grounds raised on appeal.
• United States v. Raysor
  294 F.2d 563· 3d Cir.· 1961-08-17 ·cited 20×
• United States v. Bush
  659 F.2d 163· D.C. Cir.· 1981-01-30 ·cited 14×
  Amendments to an indictment to correct a clerical error in a form number are permissible if they do not affect the substance of the charge and do not mislead the defendant. The court may decline to address issues concerning other counts if their resolution would have no practical
• Bradley v. State
  374 So. 2d 1154· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-09-18 ·cited 12×
  A conviction for first-degree murder obtained via information rather than grand jury indictment is void and can be challenged via a Rule 3.850 motion.
• de Vincent v. United States
  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.
• United States v. Staniforth
  971 F.2d 1355· 7th Cir.· 1992-08-12 ·cited 8×
• Horner v. State
  168 So. 2d 137· Fla.· 1964-10-21 ·cited 6×
  The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Federal Constitution do not require a grand jury indictment for prosecution of extortion in Florida; proceeding by information is permissible.
• Grim v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't OF Corr.
  705 F.3d 1284· 11th Cir.· 2013-01-22 ·cited 5×
  Norman Grim, a Florida death row inmate, challenged his capital sentence on federal habeas review, arguing that the Sixth and Fifth Amendments required that aggravating circumstances be charged in the indictment and found by a jury. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district cour
• Snowden v. The Honorable Amy S. Donner
  464 So. 2d 223· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-02-26 ·cited 5×
  Florida court denies petition for writ of prohibition, holding that sexual battery upon a child under twelve is not a capital crime and therefore does not require grand jury indictment under the Florida Constitution.
• United States v. Nunn
  622 F.2d 802· 5th Cir.· 1980-07-30 ·cited 4×
  Criminal contempt proceedings do not require a grand jury indictment under the Fifth Amendment.
• The Gov't OF the Canal Zone v. Richard Franklin Griffith G. (Griffith)
  459 F.2d 1036· 5th Cir.· 1972-05-15 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Fifth Amendment's grand jury indictment requirement does not apply to the Canal Zone.
• United States v. Green
  797 F.2d 855· 10th Cir.· 1986-07-22 ·cited 2×
  An indictment charging attempted escape from custody for violation of federal parole is fatally defective because a parole violation is not a criminal offense and the arrest was not lawful without a warrant.
• United States v. Kermit A. Doucet
  994 F.2d 169· 5th Cir.· 1993-06-16
  A constructive amendment to an indictment occurs when the jury is permitted to convict the defendant upon a factual basis that effectively modifies an essential element of the offense charged, requiring reversal.
• United States v. ITT Blackburn Co.
  824 F.2d 628· 8th Cir.· 1987-07-20
  The court held that ITT Corporation was improperly brought to trial because the grand jury indictment, which named ITT Blackburn Company (a division), did not name ITT Corporation as a defendant, thus violating ITT's constitutional right to be tried only on charges presented by a
• United States v. Soldano
  626 F. Supp. 384· S.D. Fla.· 1986-01-27
  An indictment for conspiracy must be sufficiently specific regarding the time frame and co-conspirators to inform the defendant of the charges and protect against double jeopardy.