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. Sherpix, Inc.
  512 F.2d 1361· D.C. Cir.· 1975-05-15 ·cited 23×
  Convictions are reversed because the trial court improperly instructed the jury on obscenity using a post-offense judicial standard (Miller) rather than the pre-offense standard (Roth-Memoirs), violating due process. Additionally, the indictment was insufficient to charge Sherpix
• United States v. Archambault
  441 F.2d 281· 10th Cir.· 1971-04-20 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the indictment was legally sufficient to apprise the appellant of the charges and that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for a mistrial.
• United States v. Varner
  437 F.2d 1195· 5th Cir.· 1971-01-28 ·cited 23×
  The court held that while the trial court has discretion regarding the timing of challenges to an indictment, the indictment in this case was insufficient because it did not adequately inform the defendant of the charges.
• Daniels v. J. B. O'Connor, M.D.
  243 So. 2d 144· Fla.· 1971-01-06 ·cited 23×
  Jesse Daniels challenged his commitment to a mental institution pending trial on a rape charge, arguing the indictment lacked sufficient evidence and that the commitment statute violated due process and equal protection. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the statute and commitment
• Long v. United States
  199 F.2d 717· 4th Cir.· 1952-11-10 ·cited 23×
  The court held that conviction under the first count of the indictment was improper because the jury may have based its verdict on a mere attempt to deceive officers, which does not satisfy the 'forcibly' element of 18 U.S.C. § 111.
• United States v. Ellender
  947 F.2d 748· 5th Cir.· 1991-11-12 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed most convictions, finding no reversible error in severance, indictment sufficiency, discovery, or prosecutorial misconduct claims, but remanded one defendant's double jeopardy claim.
• United States v. Puma
  937 F.2d 151· 5th Cir.· 1991-07-22 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy to produce and sell amphetamines but vacated one defendant's sentence due to an insufficient finding of reasonable foreseeability regarding drug quantities.
• United States v. MacKlin
  927 F.2d 1272· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-14 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the evidence against Swain was sufficient for conviction, and the district court correctly applied the preponderance of the evidence standard at sentencing.
• United States v. Slay
  858 F.2d 1310· 8th Cir.· 1988-10-06 ·cited 22×
  The court dismissed the defendants' interlocutory appeal for lack of jurisdiction and affirmed the district court's order granting a new trial, finding the instructional error was not harmless.
• 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. Fesler
  781 F.2d 384· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in its jury instructions for involuntary manslaughter by failing to define 'due caution and circumspection,' requiring vacation of those convictions. However, other convictions and sentences were affirmed.
• United States v. Vernice Garrett
  680 F.2d 650· 9th Cir.· 1982-07-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the petitioners' claims regarding the indictment's sufficiency, ineffective assistance of counsel, and sentencing disparity were without merit, and thus affirmed the dismissal of their § 2255 petition.
• United States v. Carrier
  672 F.2d 300· 2d Cir.· 1982-03-01 ·cited 22×
  An indictment charging a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 871(a) is valid on its face if it alleges the essential facts constituting the offense, and the determination of whether the words spoken constitute a true threat is a question of fact for the jury, not a matter of law for the cou
• United States v. Hancock
  604 F.2d 999· 7th Cir.· 1979-07-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictments sufficiently alleged the crime of receiving kickbacks under the Medicare and Medicaid statutes, and the statutes were not unconstitutionally vague.
• United States v. Starr
  584 F.2d 235· 8th Cir.· 1978-08-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment was not defective, but reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial due to the erroneous denial of the defendant's motion for severance.
• United States v. Harawese Rhennae Moore
  556 F.2d 479· 10th Cir.· 1977-06-03 ·cited 22×·via Indictment Specificity
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict and that the trial court did not err in denying motions to dismiss, for a bill of particulars, or to suppress evidence of a prior conviction.
• United States v. Maselli
  534 F.2d 1197· 6th Cir.· 1976-04-19 ·cited 22×
  A timely objection to a jury instruction presuming the truthfulness of every witness renders the instruction reversible error.
• United States v. Wabaunsee
  528 F.2d 1· 7th Cir.· 1975-12-30 ·cited 22×
  An indictment is insufficient if it fails to allege an essential element of the offense, and mere citation of the statute does not cure this defect.
• United States v. Russo
  527 F.2d 1051· 10th Cir.· 1975-12-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the wiretap applications and orders were sufficient because the government did not have probable cause to believe Russo was committing the offense or would use the target phones at the time of the initial wiretap authorization. Even if there were errors, they
• United States v. Pomponio
  511 F.2d 953· 4th Cir.· 1975-02-07 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Travel Act's definition of 'unlawful activity' includes commercial bribery and that the indictment was sufficient. The court affirmed one conviction and reversed a judgment of acquittal based on the interpretation of the Travel Act.
• United States v. Miranda
  494 F.2d 783· 5th Cir.· 1974-06-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient because it cited the relevant statute and the alleged conduct could not be lawful under the circumstances. The court also found no plain error in the prosecutor's closing statement or the jury instructions.
• United States v. Bruno Anthony Piet and Delmar L. Markham
  498 F.2d 178· 7th Cir.· 1974-05-20 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the jury convictions, holding that the indictment was sufficient, evidence supported possession, the motion to suppress was properly denied, and there was no evidence of a perjured witness due to an undisclosed plea bargain.
• United States v. Arrabondo
  483 F.2d 980· 8th Cir.· 1973-09-12 ·cited 22×·via Indictment Validity
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions and that the trial was free of prejudicial error, affirming the defendant's convictions.
• Reyes Correa-Negron v. United States
  473 F.2d 684· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-07 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the petitioner's claim regarding a prior invalid conviction influencing a later sentence could not be brought via a writ of error coram nobis when a statutory remedy like § 2255 was available.
• United States v. Berlin
  472 F.2d 1002· 2d Cir.· 1973-01-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that an indictment must explicitly allege knowledge of falsity for offenses requiring it, and that citing the statute is insufficient to cure such a defect. However, one count sufficiently alleged knowledge, and convictions on defective counts did not necessarily r
• United States v. Jones
  464 F.2d 1118· 8th Cir.· 1972-08-14 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the evidence supported the conviction for using false documents in a federal matter, and the jury instructions, when viewed as a whole, did not constitute plain error.
• Tritt v. United States
  421 F.2d 928· 10th Cir.· 1970-02-20 ·cited 22×
  The indictment was sufficient to apprise the appellant of the offenses charged, and the statute prohibits causing the sale or delivery of drugs regardless of the sale's legality or the recipient's status.
• Barbee v. United States
  392 F.2d 532· 5th Cir.· 1968-02-21 ·cited 22×
  The court held that possession of altered currency with intent to defraud, even without intent to pass the altered currency, violates 18 U.S.C. § 472.
• United States v. Roviaro
  379 F.2d 911· 7th Cir.· 1967-06-28 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the evidence supported the conviction, and various evidentiary and procedural issues did not warrant reversal.
• Samson Eisner v. United States
  351 F.2d 55· 6th Cir.· 1965-10-06 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the district court's denial of the motion to vacate sentence, holding that the indictment was not facially defective and that issues not raised on direct appeal or at trial could not be raised in a collateral attack.
• United States v. Donovan
  339 F.2d 404· 7th Cir.· 1964-11-03 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment's Counts 48-74 were insufficient for failing to specify which of the disjunctively defined offenses the defendant was charged with committing. However, the evidence was sufficient to support convictions under Counts 2-47.
• Sterling v. United States
  333 F.2d 443· 9th Cir.· 1964-06-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficiently definite, the evidence supported the conviction, and the prosecutor's comments, while borderline, were not prejudicial given the jury instructions and overwhelming evidence.
• Beitel v. United States
  306 F.2d 665· 5th Cir.· 1962-07-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment's description of concealed assets was too vague for the substantive count, but sufficient for the conspiracy count. The search and seizure were deemed proper.
• Carlson v. United States
  296 F.2d 909· 9th Cir.· 1961-11-08 ·cited 22×
  The court held that an information alleging the willful imparting of false information concerning the placement of explosives on an aircraft was insufficient because it failed to allege that the act was done with the intent to damage, destroy, disable, or wreck the aircraft, whic
• Paritem Singh Poonian v. United States
  294 F.2d 74· 9th Cir.· 1961-08-24 ·cited 22×
  The majority opinion reversed a conviction for making false statements to the Treasury Department, finding a fatal variance between the indictment and the proof regarding the ownership of the income reported.
• United States v. Varner
  283 F.2d 900· 7th Cir.· 1960-11-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment's allegation of holding the victim for "other reasons" was surplusage and that the allegation of holding for "reward" was insufficient without proof, thus reversing the conviction.
• United States v. Glass
  277 F.2d 566· 7th Cir.· 1960-04-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment for Count One failed to state an offense and that the admission of telephone call testimony was proper.
• United States v. Wora
  246 F.2d 283· 2d Cir.· 1957-07-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment's alleged defects were technical and did not affect substantial rights, thus not grounds for reversal.
• Williams v. United States
  239 F.2d 748· 5th Cir.· 1957-01-18 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and no reversible error occurred at trial.
• Burns v. United States
  229 F.2d 87· 8th Cir.· 1956-01-24 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a motion to vacate a judgment under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 cannot serve as a substitute for a direct appeal to challenge the sufficiency of the indictment or evidence, and successive motions are not required to be entertained.
• United States v. Anthony G. "Amos" Amadio
  215 F.2d 605· 7th Cir.· 1954-08-30 ·cited 22×·via Indictment Validity
  The dissenting judge holds that the defendant did not receive a fair trial due to numerous prejudicial errors.
• United States v. Bickford
  168 F.2d 26· 9th Cir.· 1948-05-11 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient to state a public offense and that the lower court erred in dismissing the proceeding.
• Denny v. United States
  151 F.2d 828· 4th Cir.· 1945-11-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictments were sufficient and that the evidence, including a confession, supported the convictions for conspiracy and making false statements under the Selective Training and Service Act.
• Frankfort Distilleries, Inc. v. United States
  144 F.2d 824· 10th Cir.· 1944-11-13 ·cited 22×
  The indictments were insufficient because they failed to allege the time, place, and circumstances of the unlawful agreement with sufficient particularity, making it difficult for defendants to prepare a defense.
• United States v. N.Y. Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., Inc.
  137 F.2d 459· 5th Cir.· 1943-07-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that while some allegations in the indictment were inflammatory, dismissal was premature, and the indictment sufficiently alleged venue and conspiracy. However, it was fatally defective as to two defendants due to a lack of factual allegations connecting them to th
• Welch v. Hudspeth
  132 F.2d 434· 10th Cir.· 1942-12-22 ·cited 22×
  The court held that defects in an indictment not affecting the trial court's jurisdiction are not grounds for habeas corpus relief.
• United States v. Offutt
  127 F.2d 336· D.C. Cir.· 1942-04-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient to charge conspiracy, reversing the trial court's sustaining of the demurrer.
• United States v. Beck
  118 F.2d 178· 7th Cir.· 1941-03-06 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the evidence supported the conspiracy and mail fraud convictions, and that the trial court did not commit reversible error in its rulings or conduct.
• Caldwell v. State
  43 Fla. 545· Fla.· 1901-06-01 ·cited 22×
  Joe Caldwell was convicted of unlawfully selling wine in violation of Florida's local option law prohibiting intoxicating liquor sales in counties that had voted against such sales. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the indictment was sufficiently sp
• Grant v. State
  35 Fla. 581· Fla.· 1895-01-01 ·cited 22×
  Daniel F. Grant was convicted of fraudulent conversion of proceeds from the sale of lumber entrusted to him. The Florida Supreme Court reversed his conviction, finding the indictment fatally defective for failing to adequately describe the proceeds converted, allege their receipt