Sufficiency Of Indictment

1,362 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 155 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Rook
  424 F.2d 403· 7th Cir.· 1970-03-03 ·cited 30×
  A guilty plea waives non-jurisdictional defenses, and the record demonstrated the defendant understood the charge and factual basis for his plea, even without a formal Rule 11 inquiry.
• Reyes v. United States
  417 F.2d 916· 9th Cir.· 1969-11-03 ·cited 30×·via Indictment Validity
  The court held that the appellant's arrest and the seizure of money incident to it were lawful, and that statements made by an informant and a co-conspirator were admissible.
• Hunt v. United States
  400 F.2d 306· 5th Cir.· 1968-08-19 ·cited 30×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict of guilt for violating 18 U.S.C.A. § 1503, and that the indictment and jury selection process were legally sufficient.
• United States v. Airdo
  380 F.2d 103· 7th Cir.· 1967-06-19 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently alleged knowledge and that the search and seizure were lawful based on voluntary consent.
• Marcella v. United States
  344 F.2d 876· 9th Cir.· 1965-04-30 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the appellant's motion to vacate his sentence, as the grounds raised were either previously decided, not proper for collateral attack, or unsupported by evidence.
• Glendel D. Wheeler v. United States
  317 F.2d 615· 8th Cir.· 1963-05-21 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and the evidence supported the jury's finding that a dangerous weapon was used, placing the victim's life in jeopardy.
• Garcia v. State
  142 So. 2d 318· Fla. 2d DCA· 1962-06-20 ·cited 30×
  Garcia was convicted of breaking and entering an automobile with intent to commit petit larceny. The appellate court rejected his argument that the State failed to prove property of value existed in the vehicle, holding that the crime is complete upon breaking and entering with t
• Cooper v. United States
  282 F.2d 527· 9th Cir.· 1960-09-14 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction under the false statement statute was supported by substantial evidence, and that the trial court did not err in denying his motions for dismissal, discovery, a bill of particulars, or in admitting certain testimony.
• United States v. Bailey
  277 F.2d 560· 7th Cir.· 1960-04-13 ·cited 30×
  The Court held that Count I of the indictment was insufficient for failing to allege a necessary element of the offense, but Count II was sufficient. The Court affirmed the conviction on Count II due to sufficient evidence and reversed on Count I.
• United States v. Shelton
  249 F.2d 871· 7th Cir.· 1957-12-03 ·cited 30×
  The court held that a defendant who pleads guilty and is represented by counsel is not entitled to be advised of a right to appeal, and the sufficiency of the indictment cannot be questioned on a motion to vacate unless facially defective.
• Walker v. United States
  218 F.2d 80· 7th Cir.· 1955-01-11 ·cited 30×
  A bare allegation of attorney incompetence or conspiracy is insufficient to require a hearing on a petition to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
• Aeby et ux. v. United States
  206 F.2d 296· 5th Cir.· 1953-06-30 ·cited 30×
• McCOY v. United States
  169 F.2d 776· 9th Cir.· 1948-08-24 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the indictment was valid, the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, and the trial court did not err in its rulings on evidence, jury instructions, or the denial of motions for dismissal or acquittal.
• United States v. Amorosa
  167 F.2d 596· 3d Cir.· 1948-04-06 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the indictment against Silano was not defective, the use of photographs of Amorosa was permissible, and the evidence supported conviction as principals rather than accessories. The trial judge's conduct and jury instructions were also found to be proper.
• United States v. Carruthers
  152 F.2d 512· 7th Cir.· 1945-12-27 ·cited 30×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the mailings were in furtherance of the scheme, the jury instructions on religious freedom were proper, and the denial of a mistrial due to a prejudicial newspaper article was not an abuse of discretion.
• Ellis v. State
  74 Fla. 215· Fla.· 1917-10-26 ·cited 30×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for selling mortgaged property without written consent. The court held that the indictment was sufficiently definite and that verbal consent from the lienholder was not a valid defense under the statute.
• Grant v. State
  33 Fla. 291· Fla.· 1894-01-01 ·cited 30×
  Robert Grant was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Florida Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding the evidence insufficient to sustain a first-degree murder conviction, though it affirmed the trial court's authority to
• Jordan v. State
  22 Fla. 528· Fla.· 1886-06-01 ·cited 30×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for selling liquor without a license. The court held that the indictment was sufficient, and that allowing additional testimony after closing arguments and a juror's improper comment did not warrant a new trial.
• Samish v. United States
  223 F.2d 358· 9th Cir.· 1955-05-20 ·cited 29×
  The court held that the defendant's own testimony largely admitted to receiving taxable income, and any errors in the trial were harmless given the overwhelming evidence.
• Brownlee v. State
  95 Fla. 775· Fla.· 1928-04-24 ·cited 29×
  Three defendants were convicted of murder in connection with the death of Perley Sylvester Thomas during an attempted immigration patrol stop. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, finding the trial court properly admitted evidence regarding immigration law authorit
• United States v. Rivera
  837 F.2d 906· 10th Cir.· 1988-01-20 ·cited 28×
  The admission of evidence of uncharged drug offenses to prove the continuing series element of a Continuing Criminal Enterprise (CCE) charge was improper because the indictment failed to provide adequate notice of such proof, violating the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to be
• Uresti v. James
  821 F.2d 1099· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-17 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the petitioner's guilty plea was voluntary and counsel was not ineffective, and that the indictment was sufficient and the confession claim was unsupported.
• United States v. Krasovich
  819 F.2d 253· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-10 ·cited 28×·via Indictment Requirements
  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. McKNIGHT
  799 F.2d 443· 8th Cir.· 1986-09-02 ·cited 28×
  The court held that an indictment for obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 1503 and aiding and abetting under 18 U.S.C. § 2 is not deficient for failing to explicitly allege willfulness, provided the jury instructions properly inform the jury of this element.
• United States v. Boston
  718 F.2d 1511· 10th Cir.· 1983-09-30 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the indictment was not constructively amended by jury instructions on a depletion of assets theory for Hobbs Act violations, and that the mailings of county warrants were sufficient to support mail fraud convictions.
• United States v. COX
  664 F.2d 257· 11th Cir.· 1981-12-18 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the indictment was not fatally defective, the judge's remarks were harmless error, and the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• United States v. Collins
  652 F.2d 735· 8th Cir.· 1981-06-23 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions, admission of evidence, or limitations on cross-examination, and that the indictment provided sufficient notice of the charges.
• United States v. Moore
  540 F.2d 1088· D.C. Cir.· 1976-05-25 ·cited 28×·via Indictment Requirements
  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. Harding
  475 F.2d 480· 10th Cir.· 1973-03-16 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a search by a private party, not acting in collusion with federal officers, does not violate the Fourth Amendment, and a stipulation of obscenity by the defendant is binding.
• United States v. ALO
  439 F.2d 751· 2d Cir.· 1971-02-19 ·cited 28×·via Indictment Specificity
  The court held that deliberately providing evasive answers, feigning forgetfulness, before an administrative agency can constitute obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 1505, and that a defendant must demonstrate actual prejudice to establish a Sixth Amendment speedy trial vio
• United States v. Karigiannis
  430 F.2d 148· 7th Cir.· 1970-07-08 ·cited 28×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the Travel Act was violated by traveling in interstate commerce to promote extortion, even if the state statute was labeled 'theft'.
• United States v. Eskow
  422 F.2d 1060· 2d Cir.· 1970-02-27 ·cited 28×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the evidence was sufficient to establish fraudulent intent and a common scheme to defraud, and that the trial court properly handled evidentiary issues.
• United States v. Edmondson
  410 F.2d 670· 5th Cir.· 1969-04-25 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently alleged materiality and that the evidence supported the perjury conviction.
• Dunson v. United States
  404 F.2d 447· 9th Cir.· 1968-11-19 ·cited 28×
  The court held that an indictment alleging possession of goods stolen from an interstate shipment of freight sufficiently states an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 659, even without specifying the exact facility from which the goods were stolen.
• United States v. McGUIRE
  381 F.2d 306· 2d Cir.· 1967-07-20 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the admission of recorded telephone conversations was proper, the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendants, and Perry's insanity defense was not supported by the evidence.
• United States v. Quinn
  365 F.2d 256· 7th Cir.· 1966-08-04 ·cited 28×
  The court held that Counts II and IV of the indictment were fatally defective for failing to state an offense, and that the defendant was prejudiced by the joinder of counts and the denial of severance.
• Borroto v. United States
  338 F.2d 60· 5th Cir.· 1964-11-02 ·cited 28×
  The court held that an indictment charging narcotics offenses is not defective for failing to identify the purchaser.
• Robison v. United States
  329 F.2d 156· 9th Cir.· 1964-03-12 ·cited 28×
  A guilty plea to an indictment constitutes an admission of all non-jurisdictional facts, and the sentence cannot be collaterally attacked for technical defects.
• Schnautz v. United States
  263 F.2d 525· 5th Cir.· 1959-02-18 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and the evidence supported the conspiracy conviction.
• Calvaresi v. United States
  216 F.2d 891· 10th Cir.· 1954-11-02 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the conspiracy indictment was sufficient, the term 'juror' included prospective jurors, and double jeopardy did not apply to substantive offenses distinct from the conspiracy. However, it found double jeopardy applied to the second conspiracy indictment.
• State v. Sullivan
  43 So. 2d 438· Fla.· 1949-12-20 ·cited 28×·via Indictment Validity
  Jeffie L. McClure challenges her murder indictment on grounds that the 18-member grand jury that indicted her was discharged by operation of law when Florida enacted Chapter 25554 requiring large counties to use 23-member grand juries. The Florida Supreme Court holds the indictme
• Reining v. United States
  167 F.2d 362· 5th Cir.· 1948-04-20 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and evidence supported most counts, but reversed convictions on two counts due to insufficient evidence of mailings for executing the scheme.
• Lucas v. United States
  158 F.2d 865· 4th Cir.· 1946-12-06 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a motion to vacate a judgment and sentence is proper only if the judgment is void on its face, and the indictment here was not void.
• Vogt v. United States
  156 F.2d 308· 5th Cir.· 1946-07-06 ·cited 28×
  A conviction may be based on an uncorroborated confession if there is sufficient extrinsic corroborative evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
• United States v. Michener
  152 F.2d 880· 3d Cir.· 1945-12-21 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the admission of auditors' conclusions based on unsworn statements and the denial of cross-examination on prior inconsistent statements constituted reversible error.
• Black v. State
  77 Fla. 289· Fla.· 1919-03-25 ·cited 28×
  J.C. Black, a county tax collector, was indicted for embezzling approximately $7,680 in public funds (county and state tax revenues) collected during his tenure. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction and sentence, rejecting his arguments that the indictment was vague
• Hogan v. State
  50 Fla. 86· Fla.· 1905-06-01 ·cited 28×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for attempted rape, holding that the indictment was fatally defective because it failed to specify the overt act constituting the attempt. The court emphasized that defendants must be adequately informed of the charges against them.
• Roberson v. State
  42 Fla. 223· Fla.· 1900-01-01 ·cited 28×
  Frank Roberson was convicted of murder in the killing of Deputy Sheriff Charles M. Sadler. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction and ordered a new trial due to an erroneous jury instruction regarding law enforcement officers' authority to arrest without a warrant.
• Milton v. State
  40 Fla. 251· Fla.· 1898-01-01 ·cited 28×
  Thomas Milton was convicted of first-degree murder for shooting Georgie McGraw in 1896. The Florida Supreme Court reversed due to two critical errors: an erroneous jury instruction regarding the defendant's authority as a police officer and the improper exclusion of testimony abo
• Jasper Rimes v. State
  36 Fla. 90· Fla.· 1895-06-01 ·cited 28×
  Jasper Rimes was convicted of breaking and entering a storehouse at night with intent to commit larceny. He appealed on grounds that the indictment was defective and the verdict was unsupported by evidence. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the indic