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. Fortunato
  402 F.2d 79· 2d Cir.· 1968-10-18 ·cited 101×·via Indictment Specificity
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for wilful misapplication of bank funds and that the indictment was not fatally vague. The court also found that the appellant received a fair trial.
• Miller v. State
  42 So. 3d 204· Fla.· 2010-06-03 ·cited 99×·via Indictment Requirements
  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
• The United States v. Levinson
  405 F.2d 971· 6th Cir.· 1968-12-30 ·cited 99×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to dismiss based on alleged grand jury procedural irregularities or in refusing to allow inspection of grand jury minutes.
• Williamson v. United States
  310 F.2d 192· 9th Cir.· 1962-11-13 ·cited 98×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the denial of severance and witness sequestration was proper, and evidentiary rulings were not erroneous, affirming the conviction.
• Doyle Hall v. State
  90 Fla. 719· Fla.· 1925-12-04 ·cited 97×
  Doyle Hall was convicted of arson for burning a building belonging to Sam Williams with intent to defraud Rhode Island Insurance Company. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction and granted a new trial, finding that while the circumstantial evidence proved the building
• Melvee Tucker v. State
  459 So. 2d 306· Fla.· 1984-10-25 ·cited 95×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that failure to allege venue in an indictment is an error of form rather than substance and does not render the indictment void absent a showing of prejudice to the defendant. The Court also held that a defendant's mere request for jury instructions
• United States v. Computer Scis. Corp.
  689 F.2d 1181· 4th Cir.· 1982-06-16 ·cited 95×·via Indictment Validity
  The court held that dismissals of indictments based on minor, non-prejudicial grand jury intrusions and the preemption of mail/wire fraud by the false claims statute were erroneous.
• United States v. Bullock
  451 F.2d 884· 5th Cir.· 1971-11-08 ·cited 95×
  The court affirmed Rodriguez's convictions on all counts, but reversed Bullock's conviction on Count Three due to insufficient evidence of interstate transportation.
• Downing v. United States
  348 F.2d 594· 5th Cir.· 1965-07-12 ·cited 94×
  The court held that the trial court had proper venue for a conspiracy charge when overt acts occurred within the district, even if the defendant did not personally commit them there. It also found the indictment sufficient and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evide
• Nick v. United States
  122 F.2d 660· 8th Cir.· 1941-08-30 ·cited 93×
  The court held that the Anti-Racketeering Act is constitutional and applicable to labor officials extorting money for personal profit, even in the context of wage negotiations.
• Babb v. United States
  218 F.2d 538· 5th Cir.· 1955-01-12 ·cited 92×
  The court held that the indictment was fatally defective for failing to specify the law allegedly violated by the importation of cattle, and that admitting a co-defendant's guilty plea testimony was error.
• Johnson v. United States
  207 F.2d 314· 5th Cir.· 1953-09-17 ·cited 92×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and that the denial of the motion to suppress evidence was proper, affirming the conviction.
• United States v. Rivera-Santiago
  872 F.2d 1073· 1st Cir.· 1989-03-30 ·cited 91×·via Indictment Validity
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendants of conspiracy to possess and distribute marihuana, and affirmed the convictions. The court also found that the trial court's refusal to give a specific cautionary instruction was not reversible error.
• United States v. Yonn
  702 F.2d 1341· 11th Cir.· 1983-04-22 ·cited 91×
  The court held that the government's warrantless interception of conversations in a hotel room, without prior judicial authorization or consent from the occupant, violated the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Meacham
  626 F.2d 503· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-26 ·cited 90×
  The court held that the statutes under which the defendants were convicted do not criminalize conspiracy to attempt an offense, and therefore the indictments failed to charge an offense. The court also held that the refusal to allow a defendant to cross-examine a government witne
• United States v. Lambert
  501 F.2d 943· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-20 ·cited 90×·via Indictment Requirements
  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.
• Hamilton Harrell v. State
  79 Fla. 220· Fla.· 1920-03-04 ·cited 90×
  Hamilton Harrell was convicted of uttering forged bills of exchange. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction, holding that an indictment charging uttering a forged instrument need not specify the particular means by which the forgery was created, and that the crime of u
• United States v. Varkonyi
  645 F.2d 453· 5th Cir.· 1981-05-20 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the statutes were constitutional as applied, the evidence was sufficient for conviction, and the jury instructions were not plain error.
• United States v. Freeman
  619 F.2d 1112· 5th Cir.· 1980-06-25 ·cited 88×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the indictment, evidentiary rulings, jury instructions, or trial events.
• Brown v. United States
  222 F.2d 293· 9th Cir.· 1955-04-14 ·cited 88×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and the evidence supported the conviction, and that appellate courts cannot review sentences within statutory limits.
• State v. Mayo
  88 Fla. 96· Fla.· 1924-06-24 ·cited 88×
  Marion Lockmiller was indicted and convicted for operating a still as a second offender under Florida's intoxicating liquor laws. The Florida Supreme Court held that the indictment was defective because it failed to properly charge a qualifying second offense under the 1923 amend
• United States v. Harrell
  737 F.2d 971· 11th Cir.· 1984-07-30 ·cited 87×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Hawkins' conviction on the Travel Act charge (Count Three), reversing that conviction, but affirmed all other convictions and rulings.
• Leary v. United States
  383 F.2d 851· 5th Cir.· 1967-09-29 ·cited 87×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for marijuana offenses did not violate his First Amendment rights, as religious practice cannot justify unlawful acts that pose a substantial threat to public safety.
• Smith v. United States
  343 F.2d 539· 5th Cir.· 1965-02-26 ·cited 87×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict for mail theft and forgery, and that the indictments were not defective.
• Disney v. State
  72 Fla. 492· Fla.· 1916-12-19 ·cited 87×
  James Disney, a police officer, was convicted of manslaughter for shooting and killing Daniel Carlton, a sheriff, following an altercation. Disney appealed, claiming the trial court erred in its jury instructions regarding self-defense, heat of passion, and the aggressor in the d
• Gaunt v. United States
  184 F.2d 284· 1st Cir.· 1950-07-28 ·cited 86×
  Filing a false and fraudulent tax return can constitute a wilful attempt to evade taxes under 26 U.S.C. § 145(b), and a conviction may be sustained under a statute not cited in the indictment if the defendant was not misled.
• O'Callaghan v. State
  429 So. 2d 691· Fla.· 1983-02-10 ·cited 85×
  John O'Callaghan was convicted of first-degree premeditated murder and sentenced to death for his role in the brutal killing of Gerald Vick. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction and death sentence, rejecting O'Callaghan's challenges to the joint trial with his codefe
• United States v. Mann
  517 F.2d 259· 5th Cir.· 1975-08-07 ·cited 85×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the indictment based on extrinsic evidence and constitutional grounds, as the indictment sufficiently alleged a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 656 and double jeopardy had not attached.
• Lamb v. State
  90 Fla. 844· Fla.· 1925-12-19 ·cited 85×
  John J. Lamb was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed on numerous grounds, including the sufficiency of the indictment, admissibility of evidence of prior threats, jury procedures, and alleged juror disqualification. The Florida Supreme
• Mills v. State
  58 Fla. 74· Fla.· 1909-06-01 ·cited 85×
  Bill Mills was convicted of selling cotton and corn subject to a statutory lien without the written consent of the lienholder. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the indictment adequately charged the offense and that proof of criminal intent to defeat
• Holmes v. United States
  134 F.2d 125· 8th Cir.· 1943-03-04 ·cited 84×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the procedure regarding peremptory challenges and co-defendant pleas was proper, and there was substantial evidence to sustain the conviction for mail fraud and conspiracy.
• United States v. Gordon
  780 F.2d 1165· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-16 ·cited 83×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, extrinsic evidence was properly admitted with limiting instructions, cross-examination was not unduly restricted, and inconsistent jury verdicts are permissible.
• United States v. Winkle
  587 F.2d 705· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-11 ·cited 83×
  The court held that the defendant's arguments regarding the indictment, trial conduct, and jury impropriety were without merit or constituted harmless error, thus affirming his convictions.
• Will Tindall v. State
  99 Fla. 1132· Fla.· 1930-05-17 ·cited 83×
  Will Tindall was convicted of perjury for false testimony given before a grand jury investigating the illicit sale of intoxicating liquors. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting challenges to the sufficiency of the indictment, the corroboration of evidence,
• United States v. DiMURO
  540 F.2d 503· 10th Cir.· 1976-06-29 ·cited 81×·via Indictment Validity
  The court held that the exchange of gambling information and lay-off bets established a single illegal gambling business, wiretap authorizations were proper, and voice identifications and searches were lawful.
• Peel v. State
  150 So. 2d 281· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-02-01 ·cited 81×
  Joseph Peel appeals his life sentence for being an accessory before the fact to first-degree murder after entering a nolo contendere plea. The Florida appellate court affirms, holding that nolo contendere pleas have the same effect as guilty pleas for purposes of the case in whic
• Leslie v. State
  35 Fla. 171· Fla.· 1895-01-01 ·cited 81×
  John Leslie was convicted of entering a building with intent to commit larceny and sentenced to one year in prison. The Florida Supreme Court upheld the conviction on writ of error, rejecting multiple challenges including venue denial, admission of evidence, jury instructions, an
• United States v. Cuesta
  597 F.2d 903· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-25 ·cited 80×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that covert entry for installing surveillance devices is permissible under Title III and that the agents' interview notes were not Jencks Act statements.
• Gariepy v. United States
  189 F.2d 459· 6th Cir.· 1951-05-28 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the net worth method was properly applied, and the evidence supported the conviction for tax evasion.
• Mellor v. United States
  160 F.2d 757· 8th Cir.· 1947-04-10 ·cited 80×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the evidence supported the conviction, and the government's arguments were not prejudicial misconduct.
• Davis v. State
  54 Fla. 34· Fla.· 1907-06-01 ·cited 79×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a conviction for breaking and entering, holding that the trial court properly excluded rebuttal testimony and that jury instructions, when considered as a whole, were not erroneous. The case clarifies standards for admitting rebuttal evidence an
• United States v. Harrison A. Williams, Jr.
  705 F.2d 603· 2d Cir.· 1983-04-05 ·cited 78×·via Indictment Specificity
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence for the jury to conclude the defendants were predisposed to commit the crimes charged, rejecting claims of entrapment as a matter of law and outrageous government conduct.
• United States v. Ramos
  666 F.2d 469· 11th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous or vague, the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, and any variance between the indictment and proof was harmless error.
• United States v. Mekjian
  505 F.2d 1320· 5th Cir.· 1975-01-06 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the indictment's failure to allege the essential element of "willfulness" requires reversal of the conviction. It also held that Bureau of Health Insurance history files were improperly admitted without proper certification.
• United States v. Cooper
  464 F.2d 648· 10th Cir.· 1972-07-12 ·cited 78×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdicts and rejecting numerous procedural and evidentiary challenges raised by the appellants.
• United States v. Missler
  414 F.2d 1293· 4th Cir.· 1969-08-25 ·cited 78×
  The court held that the admission of agents' testimony regarding a conversation in a third party's home, where one party consented to the agents' presence, did not violate the Fourth Amendment, and that statements made in furtherance of a new crime after indictment are admissible
• United States v. Helmel
  769 F.2d 1306· 8th Cir.· 1985-08-08 ·cited 77×·via Vagueness Of Indictment
  The court held that the admission of the ledger was proper for Stowe, Helmel, and Glick under the coconspirator rule, but reversed Paulsen's conviction due to insufficient independent evidence to support the admission of the ledger against him. The court also found that Stowe and
• United States v. Graves
  669 F.2d 964· 5th Cir.· 1982-03-08 ·cited 77×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and the evidence supported the conviction for conspiracy to violate the Dyer Act. The court also found no plain error in jury instructions or the judge's comments.
• United States v. Oakley G. Smith
  523 F.2d 771· 5th Cir.· 1975-11-17 ·cited 76×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for making false statements within the jurisdiction of HEW, and that the indictment was not vague or subject to fatal variance.
• Gebhard v. United States
  422 F.2d 281· 9th Cir.· 1970-02-09 ·cited 76×
  The court held that a seventeen-year sentence for perjury, while substantial, was not cruel and unusual punishment as it fell within statutory limits. It also found the indictment sufficient, jury selection constitutional, and the admission of the grand jury transcript permissibl