Sufficiency Of Indictment

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

• United States v. Richardson
  694 F.2d 251· 11th Cir.· 1982-12-20 ·cited 2×
  An indictment under 18 U.S.C. § 659 is not insufficient for failing to specify the instrumentality of interstate commerce from which goods were stolen, and a defendant charged solely with possession of stolen goods cannot claim a variance if evidence suggests he also stole them.
• Goins v. State
  406 So. 2d 1199· Fla. 2d DCA· 1981-11-13 ·cited 2×
  Dale Dean Goins appealed his convictions for second-degree murder, kidnapping, robbery with a firearm, and attempted involuntary sexual battery. The appellate court reversed the kidnapping conviction because the indictment failed to identify the specific felony that Goins alleged
• United States v. Phillippi
  655 F.2d 792· 7th Cir.· 1981-07-29 ·cited 2×
  An indictment charging assault with a dangerous weapon under 18 U.S.C. § 113(c) is not defective for failing to allege the assault was committed without just cause or excuse.
• United States v. Midtaune
  589 F.2d 370· 8th Cir.· 1979-01-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the search warrant affidavit was sufficiently detailed and corroborated to establish probable cause, and the indictment was not vague.
• United States v. Matthews
  572 F.2d 208· 9th Cir.· 1977-11-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the information in the search warrant affidavit was not stale and the indictment was sufficiently specific.
• Fairman v. United States
  544 F.2d 197· 5th Cir.· 1976-12-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment's counts were sufficiently distinct to support separate offenses and consecutive sentences.
• United States v. TYE
  519 F.2d 586· 10th Cir.· 1975-07-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that delivering packages that are moving in interstate commerce, even if the truck remains within a single state, satisfies the requirement that the employee be riding in a vehicle moving in interstate commerce under 18 U.S.C. § 660.
• Moore v. United States
  512 F.2d 1255· 4th Cir.· 1975-02-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for possessing a prohibited firearm was valid, despite a variance between the indictment and the proof, because the weapon qualified as an 'any other weapon' under federal law and the variance was not prejudicial.
• United States v. McBRIDE
  498 F.2d 683· D.C. Cir.· 1974-05-07 ·cited 2×
• United States v. Pollard
  491 F.2d 1387· 5th Cir.· 1974-04-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the second count of the indictment was sufficient to charge an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 912 because it alleged all essential elements, including intent to defraud.
• Hughes v. Thompson
  415 U.S. 1301· U.S.· 1974-01-25 ·cited 2×
  The Circuit Justice denied the motion for leave to file a petition for writ of mandamus and/or prohibition.
• United States v. Sorrell
  473 F.2d 1054· 7th Cir.· 1973-01-17 ·cited 2×
  A conviction for refusing induction must be reversed if the indictment is so vague that it fails to provide reasonable notice of the specific charges, or if the government presents insufficient evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Lent
  432 F.2d 440· 4th Cir.· 1970-10-08 ·cited 2×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding the indictment legally sufficient and no prejudice from concurrent sentences despite potential merger of offenses.
• Alley v. United States
  426 F.2d 877· 8th Cir.· 1970-05-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the appellant's motion to vacate his conviction, as his claims of improper indictment amendment, improper severance, ineffective assistance of counsel, and improper use of a codefendant's confession lacked merit.
• Love v. Perini
  418 F.2d 905· 6th Cir.· 1969-12-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant has not exhausted his available state remedies for his habeas corpus claims.
• United States v. Slatton
  388 F.2d 676· 6th Cir.· 1968-01-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that an indictment under the Dyer Act is sufficient if it accurately describes the motor vehicle, even without specific details like model or serial number.
• Cummins v. United States
  368 F.2d 819· 9th Cir.· 1966-11-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that defects in an indictment must be raised on direct appeal and cannot be raised in a motion to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, unless the indictment is so fatally defective as to deprive the court of jurisdiction.
• United States v. Poitras
  339 F.2d 428· 4th Cir.· 1964-12-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing the accused the number of peremptory challenges permitted in a capital case, as the indictment did not sufficiently allege a capital offense.
• Suarez v. United States
  333 F.2d 366· 5th Cir.· 1964-06-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a motion to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was properly denied because the sentence was based on a voluntary guilty plea, and any defects in the complaint or warrant were cured by a subsequent sufficient indictment.
• United States v. Beddy G. Cury
  313 F.2d 337· 3d Cir.· 1963-02-05 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the evidence supported the conviction for false oaths in bankruptcy, and the jury instructions were not erroneous.
• Foster v. Commonwealth OF Ky. & David L. Davis
  311 F.2d 212· 6th Cir.· 1962-12-27 ·cited 2×
  Retrial after a conviction is reversed due to an insufficient indictment does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• United States v. Baumgarten
  300 F.2d 807· 2d Cir.· 1962-03-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment and evidence were sufficient, and the expert witness was qualified, affirming the conviction.
• Larch v. Sacks
  290 F.2d 548· 6th Cir.· 1961-05-29 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the appellant's applications for a certificate of probable cause and leave to appeal in forma pauperis were denied because he failed to state facts sufficient to entitle him to relief.
• United States v. Deitle
  274 F.2d 117· 7th Cir.· 1960-01-25 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant's guilty pleas were valid and not subject to collateral attack under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255, as the indictments and informations sufficiently charged a violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 2314.
• Hollowell v. United States
  245 F.2d 829· 6th Cir.· 1957-06-20 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the defendant was properly sentenced as a repeat offender under the Boggs Act, as his prior convictions for marijuana offenses were covered by the statute.
• Vasquez v. United States
  229 F.2d 288· 5th Cir.· 1956-02-02 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently described the offenses for the first count, but the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to support a conviction on the second count.
• Morneau v. United States
  181 F.2d 642· 8th Cir.· 1950-04-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment was not fatally defective and affirmed the denial of the motion to vacate the sentence.
• Tonker v. United States
  178 F.2d 712· D.C. Cir.· 1949-10-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient to inform the defendant of the charges against him and allow for preparation of his defense.
• Hickman v. United States
  170 F.2d 353· 5th Cir.· 1948-11-04 ·cited 2×
  An indictment under 18 U.S.C. § 2312 is not defective for omitting the word 'unlawfully' if the statute itself does not include it.
• Applebaum v. United States
  164 F.2d 974· 5th Cir.· 1947-12-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficiently specific and that the jury instructions were proper. The evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• Randolph v. United States
  165 F.2d 20· D.C. Cir.· 1947-12-08 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently charged the statutory offense and that no conflict existed between the search warrant affidavit and the affiant's testimony.
• Phelps v. United States
  160 F.2d 626· 9th Cir.· 1947-03-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and that the evidence presented was adequate to support the conviction, disregarding minor technical defects that did not prejudice the defendant.
• LEA v. United States
  159 F.2d 939· 5th Cir.· 1947-02-15 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient to charge the defendant with embezzlement and that the overruling of the demurrer was not error.
• Garza v. United States
  159 F.2d 413· 5th Cir.· 1947-02-11 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and the jury charge contained no prejudicial error, supporting the conviction.
• United States v. Peskoe
  157 F.2d 935· 3d Cir.· 1946-11-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently charged an offense under the Selective Training and Service Act and that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to find criminal intent, thus the trial judge did not err in refusing to direct a verdict of acquittal.
• United States v. Kaplan
  156 F.2d 922· 2d Cir.· 1946-08-01 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment's failure to explicitly allege that the goods were moving in interstate commerce at the time of theft was a defect of form, not substance, and not grounds for reversal.
• United States v. Leiner
  143 F.2d 298· 2d Cir.· 1944-06-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that while the indictment was technically faulty for not alleging the person traded with was an actual enemy agent, the defendant could not have been misled, and the conviction should be affirmed.
• Lelles v. United States
  120 F.2d 447· 9th Cir.· 1941-06-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and the evidence supported the conviction for mail fraud.
• Brown v. State
  101 Fla. 223· Fla.· 1931-04-15 ·cited 2×
  A. C. Brown, as administrator of an estate, was convicted of secreting property with intent to embezzle under Florida law. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that an administrator can be criminally liable for embezzlement of estate property and that the in
• Joiner v. State
  92 Fla. 711· Fla.· 1926-09-22 ·cited 2×
  John Joiner was convicted of a second violation of Florida's prohibition law and sentenced to a $200 fine and one year's hard labor. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction, holding that the indictment's allegation of a prior conviction was defective because it failed t
• Capps v. State
  87 Fla. 388· Fla.· 1924-04-12 ·cited 2×
  George Capps was convicted of incest with his niece Ada Capps. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction, holding that an indictment charging incest need not expressly use the word 'consanguinity' where it clearly identifies the defendant and victim's blood relationship b
• Isom Wilson v. State
  78 Fla. 41· Fla.· 1919-06-26 ·cited 2×
  This case addresses whether an indictment is invalid if it omits the name of the county where the grand jury convened. The court held that such an omission is not fatal, especially when the indictment otherwise specifies the county and a statute exists to cure minor defects.
• Davis v. State
  76 Fla. 459· Fla.· 1918-11-15 ·cited 2×
  This case reviews a conviction for bigamy. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, holding that the indictment was sufficient and that the evidence presented was adequate to support the jury's verdict.
• Hardy Webb v. State
  69 Fla. 697· Fla.· 1915-06-07 ·cited 2×
  This case involves a defendant indicted for obtaining property by false pretenses. The appellate court reversed the conviction, finding the indictment insufficient because it failed to specifically allege the ownership of the property obtained and did not describe the merchandise
• Blackwell v. State
  69 Fla. 453· Fla.· 1915-04-20 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a second-degree murder conviction, holding that minor clerical errors in the indictment did not prejudice the defendant. The court found that the errors were matters of form and did not mislead or embarrass the accused in his defense.
• Kinchien v. State
  50 Fla. 102· Fla.· 1905-06-01 ·cited 2×
  This case reviews a conviction for attempting to burn a dwelling house. The court affirmed the conviction, finding that the indictment sufficiently apprised the defendant of the charges and that the jury selection process was valid. The ruling clarifies that an indictment for att
• Johnson v. State
  47 Fla. 35· Fla.· 1904-01-01 ·cited 2×
  Jim Johnson was convicted of uttering and publishing a forged order. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the instrument at issue qualified as a forged order under Florida law despite its seemingly trivial nature, because it created a legal obligation c
• Asberry Barnes v. State
  46 Fla. 96· Fla.· 1903-06-01 ·cited 2×
  Asberry Barnes was convicted of larceny for stealing money orders (pay checks) from the Florida East Coast Railway Company. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting arguments that the indictment was defective and that money orders could not be the subject of l
• Darby v. State
  41 Fla. 274· Fla.· 1899-01-01 ·cited 2×
  Clarence Darby was convicted of altering a county warrant by fraudulently changing the amount from ten dollars to one hundred dollars. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the indictment properly alleged the crime of forgery with intent to defraud a cou
• Hamp Sharp v. State
  28 Fla. 357· Fla.· 1891-06-01 ·cited 2×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for playing cards for money, holding that the indictment was insufficient because it failed to name the person(s) with whom the defendant played or state that they were unknown to the grand jury. This decision follows established pr