Sufficiency Of Indictment

1,362 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Ware v. United States
  309 F.2d 457· 8th Cir.· 1962-10-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the files and records conclusively show the prisoner is entitled to no relief, and the District Court did not err in refusing a hearing on the petition.
• Everitt v. United States
  306 F.2d 839· 5th Cir.· 1962-07-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment was not fatally defective for failing to charge that the appellant 'knowingly' caused the mails to be used, and that the evidence sufficiently showed mail transmission as part of the fraudulent scheme.
• Browder v. United States
  292 F.2d 44· 5th Cir.· 1961-06-21 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the evidence supported the conviction, and the trial court did not err in its conduct.
• Brinson v. Wilkinson
  271 F.2d 790· 5th Cir.· 1959-11-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that habeas corpus is not available when the remedy under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 is not inadequate or ineffective.
• In re Cardwell
  256 F.2d 576· 9th Cir.· 1957-11-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the sufficiency of an indictment cannot be challenged by a petition for habeas corpus unless no crime was charged on its face.
• Bilderback v. United States
  249 F.2d 271· 5th Cir.· 1957-11-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the evidence supported the conviction, the jury charge was proper, and the defendant received adequate assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Deutsch
  243 F.2d 435· 3d Cir.· 1957-04-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment was insufficient to charge a conspiracy and that the government failed to prove the alleged conspiracy.
• Smith v. United States
  241 F.2d 267· 5th Cir.· 1957-02-05 ·cited 6×
• Pallett v. United States
  228 F.2d 671· 5th Cir.· 1956-01-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment was not fatally defective and that the evidence supported the finding of guilt for concealing assets.
• Richards v. Matthews
  207 F.2d 227· D.C. Cir.· 1953-07-30 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge argues that the relator should be extradited because the indictment's date variation is a technicality and the relator was in the demanding state when the crime occurred.
• Stumpf v. Matthews
  195 F.2d 35· D.C. Cir.· 1952-01-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that an indictment is valid for extradition purposes even without a specific date for the offenses, as fugitivity can be established by evidence.
• Whiting v. United States
  181 F.2d 643· 6th Cir.· 1950-04-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment's ninth count sufficiently stated an offense under 18 U.S.C.A. § 876.
• Shafer v. United States
  179 F.2d 929· 9th Cir.· 1950-01-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the textual criticisms of the indictment were unsound and that the dismissal of counts 2 and 3 did not create double jeopardy.
• Dalton v. Hunter
  174 F.2d 633· 10th Cir.· 1949-05-10 ·cited 6×
  A guilty plea waives factual defenses, and habeas corpus is limited to reviewing jurisdiction and whether the indictment charged a penal offense.
• Freeman v. United States
  158 F.2d 891· 9th Cir.· 1946-12-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment and information were not void, and that the jury instructions, when viewed as a whole, did not contain prejudicial error regarding the definition of 'wilful' or reasonable doubt.
• Kinnison v. United States
  158 F.2d 403· D.C. Cir.· 1946-11-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a misdescription of the official authorized to issue a required form does not invalidate a conviction if the official named had lawful delegated authority and no prejudice resulted.
• La Salle v. United States
  155 F.2d 452· 10th Cir.· 1946-05-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently alleged the substance of the perjury offense and the materiality of the false statements.
• Brewer v. United States
  150 F.2d 314· 9th Cir.· 1945-06-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Bates
  141 F.2d 436· 7th Cir.· 1944-02-28 ·cited 6×
  A conviction for conspiracy may be reversed as to one defendant while affirmed as to another, and the evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction for conspiracy against Smith.
• Marshall v. United States
  140 F.2d 261· 5th Cir.· 1944-02-07 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment's first count sufficiently stated an offense, and the conviction on that count was not condoned by the district attorney offering a second chance for examination. However, the third count was not proven as the evidence did not show the appellant
• Spencer v. COX
  140 F.2d 73· 8th Cir.· 1944-01-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that an indictment is not fatally defective for incorporating photostatic copies of alleged counterfeited notes by reference, and that a habeas corpus petition must affirmatively show a lack of jurisdiction.
• United States v. English
  139 F.2d 885· 5th Cir.· 1944-01-07 ·cited 6×
  An indictment charging a violation of the Interstate Commerce Act's requirement for a certificate of public convenience and necessity must negate the statutory exceptions if they are included in the enacting clause.
• Ackerschott v. United States
  139 F.2d 114· 9th Cir.· 1943-11-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently stated an offense by alleging a false representation of citizenship for a fraudulent purpose, without needing to allege knowledge that citizenship was a voting requisite.
• Moore v. United States
  128 F.2d 974· 5th Cir.· 1942-06-22 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and the evidence supported the conviction for interfering with the Selective Service Act.
• Hudspeth v. Tornello
  128 F.2d 172· 10th Cir.· 1942-05-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the indictment was insufficient to charge an offense under federal law, thus the habeas corpus petition should have been denied.
• Nailling v. United States
  142 F.2d 551· 6th Cir.· 1942-02-09 ·cited 6×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, finding that the appellant's issues were not properly raised below and that no miscarriage of justice occurred.
• McKEE v. Johnston
  125 F.2d 282· 9th Cir.· 1942-01-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appellants' habeas corpus petition was properly denied because their claims were previously adjudicated and their pleas of guilty were valid.
• Minnec v. Hudspeth
  123 F.2d 444· 10th Cir.· 1941-11-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a writ of habeas corpus may not be used to relitigate issues already decided on direct appeal or issues that could have been raised on appeal.
• Telfian v. Johnston
  122 F.2d 346· 9th Cir.· 1941-08-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the sufficiency of an indictment cannot be collaterally attacked on habeas corpus after conviction if the trial court had jurisdiction.
• Padgett v. State
  126 Fla. 57· Fla.· 1936-10-30 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction of five defendants for maliciously cutting fences, finding that the evidence was unreliable because the State's case depended almost entirely on testimony from a co-defendant witness with a poor reputation for truthfulness, pecuni
• Aldrich v. State
  123 Fla. 352· Fla.· 1936-03-30 ·cited 6×
  Arthur Aldrich, Jr. was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to twenty years imprisonment. The Florida Supreme Court reversed his conviction because the indictment was fatally defective under the precedent of Croft v. State, charging robbery in the alternative and failing to
• Walker v. State
  119 Fla. 240· Fla.· 1935-05-06 ·cited 6×
  J. E. Walker was convicted of perjury for allegedly giving false testimony at trial. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction because the indictment fatally failed to allege that Walker's oath was administered by someone legally authorized to administer oaths, an essenti
• Minger v. State
  91 Fla. 79· Fla.· 1926-01-19 ·cited 6×
  W.C. Minger challenged an indictment for forging an endorsement on a check, arguing the indictment was insufficient. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the two-count indictment was properly denied a motion to quash because the second count adequately
• Ford v. State
  80 Fla. 781· Fla.· 1920-12-03 ·cited 6×
  John Ford was convicted of breaking and entering a cotton house with intent to commit grand larceny. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, finding the indictment sufficiently alleged the statutory offense and no material errors occurred at trial.
• Miller v. State
  71 Fla. 338· Fla.· 1916-03-02 ·cited 6×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a forgery conviction where the State failed to establish that the defendant wrote the forged check, particularly after the trial court excluded the only writing samples that could have proven the defendant's handwriting.
• Ladson v. State
  56 Fla. 54· Fla.· 1908-06-01 ·cited 6×
  George Ladson was convicted of violating Florida's local option liquor law by carrying on the business of a liquor dealer in a county that voted against liquor sales. He sought a writ of error arguing the statute was unconstitutional because it prohibited the sale of all liquors
• Turnipseed v. State
  45 Fla. 110· Fla.· 1903-01-01 ·cited 6×
  Turnipseed was convicted of forgery for allegedly altering a farm lease contract by changing language about labor obligations. The Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding that the alteration was immaterial because it did not actually change the legal obligations of either party.
• McCall v. State
  31 Fla. 218· Fla.· 1893-01-01 ·cited 6×
  Robert McCall was convicted of fraudulently converting a borrowed mule to his own use in violation of Florida law. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, finding the indictment properly charged the offense under the 1883 statute.
• Snowden v. State
  17 Fla. 386· Fla.· 1879-06-01 ·cited 6×
  A justice of the peace was indicted for malpractice in office for allegedly collecting a fine from a defendant without proper legal proceedings and failing to remit it to the county treasurer. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction, holding that the indictment failed t
• Cherry v. State
  6 Fla. 679· Fla.· 1856-02-01 ·cited 6×
  James Cherry was convicted of the statutory offense of "living in a state of fornication with a colored female" in Duval County Circuit Court. On appeal, Cherry challenged the sufficiency of the indictment and grand jury finding based on technical defects in their form and design
• State v. Akers
  104 So. 3d 1259· Fla. 2d DCA· 2013-01-09 ·cited 5×
  The omission of a defendant's name in a specific count of an indictment does not render the charge fatally vague if the defendant is named in the caption and introduction and is the sole defendant.
• Ginsburg v. United States
  909 F.2d 982· 7th Cir.· 1990-08-03 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the indictment and jury instructions were sufficient to support a mail fraud conviction under McNally v. United States, as the scheme to defraud necessarily involved deprivation of property rights.
• Olsen v. McFAUL
  843 F.2d 918· 6th Cir.· 1988-04-01 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a city cannot be bound by apparent authority of its agents and that Olsen's conviction for issuing a bad check was not constitutionally flawed despite the absence of an underlying debt.
• Rion v. Purdy
  212 So. 2d 304· Fla. 3d DCA· 1968-07-02 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in dismissing the petition for writ of habeas corpus and remanding the appellant for rendition, as the extradition warrant was valid and supported by competent evidence.
• United States v. Foster
  253 F.2d 457· 7th Cir.· 1958-03-17 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the defendant's motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was properly denied because the indictment was sufficient and the sentencing error was not prejudicial.
• Hallman v. United States
  208 F.2d 825· D.C. Cir.· 1953-07-07 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the indictment misled the defendant by specifying a transaction with James Fair in one count and then stating the same narcotics were involved in other counts without specifying the actual party to the transaction, thus violating the Sixth Amendment right to b
• Griffin v. United States
  173 F.2d 909· 6th Cir.· 1949-04-18 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the second two-year sentence imposed for failure to possess a registration certificate was invalid because the indictment failed to state an offense.
• Pyle v. Johnston
  137 F.2d 869· 9th Cir.· 1943-08-27 ·cited 5×
  A habeas corpus petition cannot collaterally attack a conviction based on an indictment's alleged failure to state an offense if the trial court had jurisdiction.
• United States v. Gbenedio
  95 F.4th 1319· 11th Cir.· 2024-03-06 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the indictment was sufficiently specific, the district court did not abuse its discretion in its evidentiary rulings, and the defendant had the ability to pay the imposed fine.
• S.F. v. State
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2023-09-20 ·cited 4×
  An indictment is not defective for failing to explicitly allege an essential element of a crime if it references a specific criminal statute that sufficiently details all elements of the offense.