Indictment Requirements

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

• Jent v. State
  408 So. 2d 1024· Fla.· 1981-12-03 ·cited 302×
  William Jent appeals his conviction for first-degree murder and death sentence following the brutal rape and burning death of a young woman in a Florida game preserve. The Florida Supreme Court affirms the conviction and sentence, rejecting multiple appellate challenges including
• The United States v. Honorable W. Harold COX
  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.
• United States v. Riley Harrington Keller, III
  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
• United States v. Ignasio Maldenaldo Sanchez
  269 F.3d 1250· 11th Cir.· 2001-10-17 ·cited 114×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentences of the Sanchezes. The concurring judges argued that no Apprendi error occurred because the sentences did not exceed the statutory maximum under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C). They also contended that the "Rogers error" did not apply bec
• Miller v. State
  42 So. 3d 204· Fla.· 2010-06-03 ·cited 99×
  Lionel Miller was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for killing 72-year-old Jerry Smith during a botched burglary and robbery attempt on Easter Sunday 2006. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Miller's conviction and death sentence, rejecting constitutional c
• United States v. Lambert
  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.
• Mose Penny v. State
  140 Fla. 155· Fla.· 1939-09-29 ·cited 62×
  Mose Penny was indicted as an accessory before the fact to murder but convicted by jury of murder in the second degree as a co-principal. The Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding that a defendant cannot be convicted of an offense different from that charged in the indictment,
• United States v. Hobson
  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.
• Kirkland v. State
  86 Fla. 64· Fla.· 1923-06-20 ·cited 60×
  Kirkland, a Jackson County Commissioner, was convicted of embezzling public funds and property under his official custody. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that a County Commissioner who lawfully receives county property by virtue of his office has a dut
• United States v. Galloway
  976 F.2d 414· 8th Cir.· 1992-09-17 ·cited 52×
  The court held that U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3(a)(2) is authorized by statute and does not violate constitutional rights, allowing consideration of uncharged conduct in sentencing.
• United States v. Jackson
  824 F.2d 21· D.C. Cir.· 1987-07-17 ·cited 46×
  The Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) is a sentence enhancement provision, not a separate offense, and thus prior convictions need not be alleged in the indictment to apply its enhanced penalties. Furthermore, the defendant waived his sufficiency of evidence claim by failing to mo
• United States v. Bryan
  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.
• United States v. Krepper
  159 F.2d 958· 3d Cir.· 1946-12-11 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and the defendant's conviction was proper, as the evidence supported the charges and the statutory interpretations were correct.
• United States v. Wilson
  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.
• United States v. Gibson
  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
• United States v. Gibbs
  813 F.2d 596· 3d Cir.· 1987-03-02 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the quantity of marijuana is an essential element of an offense under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(6) and must be alleged in the indictment to support a sentence under that provision.
• United States v. Italiano
  837 F.2d 1480· 11th Cir.· 1988-02-22 ·cited 38×
  The indictment sufficiently alleged a scheme to defraud the county of property (a cable television franchise) through bribery, thus satisfying the mail fraud statute's requirements after McNally.
• United States v. Keith
  605 F.2d 462· 9th Cir.· 1979-09-26 ·cited 38×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority incorrectly added a new element to involuntary manslaughter by requiring gross negligence or foreseeability, rather than merely defining existing statutory language.
• United States v. Rumney
  867 F.2d 714· 1st Cir.· 1989-02-08 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the provision for heightened penalties for thrice-convicted felons possessing firearms is a sentence enhancement, not an element of a crime, and that alleged omissions from a warrant affidavit were not material to probable cause.
• United States v. Payne
  940 F.2d 286· 8th Cir.· 1991-06-28 ·cited 34×
  The court held that defendants' sentences were improperly enhanced based on crack cocaine amounts not charged in the indictment or proven at trial.
• United States v. Van Den Berg
  139 F.2d 654· 7th Cir.· 1944-01-06 ·cited 32×
  The court held that a defendant convicted of failing to report for induction cannot challenge the Selective Service Board's classification in a criminal trial, as judicial review of such classifications is barred by statute.
• United States v. Brewer
  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.
• United States v. Krasovich
  819 F.2d 253· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-10 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove Krasovich's knowledge of and agreement to the conspiracy's objective of impeding tax collection.
• United States v. Moore
  540 F.2d 1088· D.C. Cir.· 1976-05-25 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the enhanced punishment under 21 U.S.C. § 845(a) was improper because the age of the distributee, which triggers the enhancement, is an element of the offense that must be alleged in the indictment and found by the jury.
• United States v. Brewer
  853 F.2d 1319· 6th Cir.· 1988-08-01 ·cited 27×
  The Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) creates a new offense requiring elements to be charged in the indictment and proved at trial, not merely a sentencing enhancement.
• United States v. Pandilidis
  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.
• Umbriaco v. United States
  258 F.2d 625· 9th Cir.· 1958-07-22 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the evidence presented was insufficient to prove the charge in Count 2 of the indictment.
• United States v. Balano
  618 F.2d 624· 10th Cir.· 1979-12-18 ·cited 24×
• Henderson v. State
  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
• United States v. Alton R. Moss
  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.
• State v. Stabile
  443 So. 2d 398· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-01-04 ·cited 17×
  The State of Florida appealed the dismissal of antitrust charges against Dominic Stabile and Lucas Mesa. The trial court dismissed the charges twice—first because the state failed to comply with new statutory procedures enacted after charging, and second based on law of the case
• United States v. Royal
  972 F.2d 643· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-08 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the admission of certain evidence, even if erroneous, was harmless error due to overwhelming evidence of guilt, and that the defendant's sentence was properly calculated based on drug quantity as a sentencing factor.
• United States v. Elgersma
  929 F.2d 1538· 11th Cir.· 1991-04-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the burden of proving criminal forfeiture is not beyond a reasonable doubt, but rather a preponderance of the evidence standard applies.
• United States v. Martin
  482 F.2d 202· 8th Cir.· 1973-07-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the trial court did not err in its rulings.
• In re Amendments TO THE Fla. Rules OF Crim. Procedure-Rules 3.140 & 3.986
  603 So. 2d 1144· Fla.· 1992-05-28 ·cited 12×
  The Florida Supreme Court adopted amendments to Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.140 and 3.986, revising indictment forms and judgment/sentencing forms. The Court rejected some proposed changes from the Sentencing Disposition Forms Committee while adopting recommendations from the C
• United States v. Rivera
  874 F.2d 754· 10th Cir.· 1989-05-19 ·cited 12×
  The en banc court was evenly divided on whether the indictment was sufficient to allege a continuing criminal enterprise and whether uncharged offenses could be admitted as proof. Therefore, the trial court's decision on these specific issues is affirmed by an equally divided cou
• 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. Williams
  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.
• Natividad Salinas v. United States
  277 F.2d 914· 9th Cir.· 1960-05-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that an indictment for arson in the first degree, which involves burning a dwelling house, necessarily includes the charge of arson in the second degree, as a dwelling house is a type of building or structure.
• United States v. Young
  936 F.2d 1050· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the 'deadly or dangerous weapon' provision of 18 U.S.C. § 111 is a sentence enhancement, not a separate offense, and thus did not need to be alleged in the indictment. The court also affirmed that federal courts have jurisdiction over crimes of general federal
• United States v. Johnson
  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.
• United States v. Pleasant
  469 F.2d 1121· 8th Cir.· 1972-12-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the seizure of the shotgun was lawful under Terry v. Ohio and its progeny, but the evidence was insufficient to prove the firearm was traveling in or affecting interstate commerce.
• Hatchett v. Gov't of Guam
  212 F.2d 767· 9th Cir.· 1954-03-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the defendant was not entitled to a jury trial for the offenses charged in Guam, but reversed the conviction for involuntary manslaughter due to prosecution by information instead of indictment.
• United States v. Doshen
  133 F.2d 757· 3d Cir.· 1943-02-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the officer who administered the oath lacked the authority to do so under the relevant statute, and the indictment charged a non-existent crime. However, the court affirmed a conviction for a false statement on an alien registration form.
• United States v. Mosley
  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
• Needham Bass v. State
  17 Fla. 685· Fla.· 1880-01-01 ·cited 6×
  Needham Bass challenged his conviction for larceny, arguing that the indictment was improperly presented, he was forced to trial without counsel, and the court lacked jurisdiction because the trial occurred at an illegal term. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction, ho
• Fields v. Soloff
  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.
• United States v. Brown
  458 F.2d 375· 6th Cir.· 1972-03-29 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the conviction for making a false statement in connection with a firearm purchase but vacated the conviction for firearm possession.
• Rought v. Henderson
  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.
• Heath v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't OF Corr.
  717 F.3d 1202· 11th Cir.· 2013-06-11 ·cited 3×
  Ronald Palmer Heath, a Florida death row inmate, challenged his capital conviction and death sentence on federal habeas review, arguing that the Sixth and Fifth Amendments required that aggravating circumstances be specified in the indictment and found by a grand jury. The Eleven