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

• Lauer v. United States
  320 F.2d 187· 7th Cir.· 1963-07-17 ·cited 76×
  An indictment for unlawful sale of narcotics under 26 U.S.C.A. § 4705(a) is insufficient to support a conviction if it fails to name the purchaser or properly excuse the omission, as the purchaser's identity is central to the offense.
• Rivera v. United States
  318 F.2d 606· 9th Cir.· 1963-05-28 ·cited 76×
  The court held that the inclusion of parole eligibility under 18 U.S.C.A. § 4208(a)(2) in a sentence for a violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 176a was unauthorized by statute, as that section prohibits parole for such offenses.
• Gendron v. United States
  295 F.2d 897· 8th Cir.· 1961-11-08 ·cited 76×
  The court held that the defendant waived his right to appeal on jury instructions and sufficiency of evidence by failing to properly object or renew motions below, and that the indictment was not fatally defective. The court also found no plain error regarding the search and seiz
• United States v. Perlstein
  126 F.2d 789· 3d Cir.· 1942-02-20 ·cited 76×
  The court held that an indictment for conspiracy to obstruct justice requires an allegation and proof that a proceeding was actually pending and that the defendants knew of it.
• Strobhar v. State
  55 Fla. 167· Fla.· 1908-01-01 ·cited 76×
  James N. Strobhar was convicted of embezzling $7,500 from the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company and challenged his conviction on multiple grounds. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the indictment was sufficiently detailed despite technical defects, that his prio
• United States v. Martell
  335 F.2d 764· 4th Cir.· 1964-08-10 ·cited 75×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient to satisfy Rule 7(c) and that the sentence, being within statutory limits, was not subject to appellate review.
• United States v. Stefan
  784 F.2d 1093· 11th Cir.· 1986-03-20 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions, that the district court did not err in admitting evidence or instructing the jury regarding civil banking statute violations, that the prosecutor's remarks were improper but not prejudicial, that the RICO
• United States v. Silverman
  745 F.2d 1386· 11th Cir.· 1984-11-05 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently alleged a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1503, the evidence was sufficient for conviction, the jury instructions were proper, the subpoena for disciplinary complaints was valid, and the exclusion of certain evidence was not an abuse of di
• United States v. Arnetta Weatherspoon
  581 F.2d 595· 7th Cir.· 1978-07-12 ·cited 74×
  The court held that a defendant can be prosecuted under both the mail fraud and false statements statutes for the same conduct, that mail fraud indictments need not use exact statutory language, that false statements made to the government can support prosecution if knowingly mad
• United States v. Garland Jeffers
  532 F.2d 1101· 7th Cir.· 1976-03-30 ·cited 74×
  A prior conviction for conspiracy to distribute narcotics does not bar a subsequent prosecution for engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise under 21 U.S.C. § 848 on double jeopardy grounds, as they are not the "same offense."
• United States v. Rizzo
  418 F.2d 71· 7th Cir.· 1969-09-18 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the admission of Elia's statement was not plain error despite Miranda issues due to lack of specific objection, and co-conspirator statements and state conviction records were admissible or harmless error.
• United States v. Bowe
  360 F.2d 1· 2d Cir.· 1966-04-28 ·cited 74×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the pre-trial rulings or the trial proceedings.
• United States v. Thompson
  356 F.2d 216· 2d Cir.· 1965-12-06 ·cited 74×
  The court held that evidence seized from the appellant's hotel room was admissible, either based on voluntary consent or as incident to a lawful arrest, and that the indictment, though imperfect, was sufficient given the context and timing of the challenge.
• Isadore Blumenfield v. United States
  284 F.2d 46· 8th Cir.· 1960-11-15 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the indictments were sufficient, the denial of a change of venue was not an abuse of discretion, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for violating the White Slave Traffic Act and conspiracy.
• United States v. Remington
  191 F.2d 246· 2d Cir.· 1951-08-22 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the jury charge on the definition of Communist Party membership was too vague and indefinite, violating the specific proof requirements for perjury convictions.
• Ex-parte Charles D. Prince.-Habeas Corpus
  27 Fla. 196· Fla.· 1891-01-01 ·cited 74×
  This case concerns whether a writ of habeas corpus can be used to challenge an indictment for larceny of U.S. currency. The court held that habeas corpus is not a substitute for a demurrer or motion to quash and cannot be used to correct mere technical defects in an indictment if
• United States v. Odell Bennett
  539 F.2d 45· 10th Cir.· 1976-06-28 ·cited 73×
  The court held that the defendant's vacillating positions on self-representation justified the trial court's denial of his request, and that other asserted errors were either legally insufficient or not grounds for reversal.
• Darty v. State
  161 So. 2d 864· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-03-04 ·cited 72×
  D.C. Darty, a 75-year-old former police chief, shot and killed Robert E. Stokes on January 15, 1962, claiming self-defense when Stokes allegedly drew a rake to strike him. Darty was convicted of second-degree murder, and this appeal addresses 31 assignments of error across 11 poi
• Russell v. United States
  306 F.2d 402· 9th Cir.· 1962-08-03 ·cited 72×
  The court held that 26 U.S.C. § 5841 unconstitutionally compels self-incrimination in violation of the Fifth Amendment, and that the information count failed to charge a crime under 26 U.S.C. § 5851.
• United States v. Gordon
  253 F.2d 177· 7th Cir.· 1958-02-19 ·cited 72×
• Madsen v. United States
  165 F.2d 507· 10th Cir.· 1947-12-17 ·cited 71×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the counts were not duplicitous, the jury instructions were not erroneous, and the evidence was sufficient to support the guilty verdict.
• United States v. Becton
  751 F.2d 250· 8th Cir.· 1984-12-27 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the continuing criminal enterprise (CCE) conviction and the first Travel Act conviction, but not the second Travel Act conviction. The court also found no reversible error in evidentiary rulings or indictment defects.
• United States v. Shavin
  287 F.2d 647· 7th Cir.· 1961-02-14 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the exclusion of evidence tending to show the defendant's good faith and intent to defraud was error, requiring reversal and remand for a new trial.
• United States v. Rivera
  900 F.2d 1462· 10th Cir.· 1990-04-04 ·cited 69×
  The court held that while there were trial errors, the cumulative effect did not warrant reversal due to a lack of demonstrated prejudice. Resentencing is necessary.
• Henry v. State
  81 Fla. 763· Fla.· 1921-05-30 ·cited 69×
  Annie Henry was convicted of manslaughter as a principal in the second degree to a murder allegedly perpetrated by Ethel Everett. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the indictment was sufficiently clear despite omitting the word 'aid' (using synonymou
• United States v. Sweeney
  688 F.2d 1131· 7th Cir.· 1982-09-15 ·cited 68×
  The court held that an affidavit based on an experienced agent's recognition of a distinctive odor associated with methamphetamine manufacture, combined with other facts, established sufficient probable cause for a search warrant. The court also held that Grand Jury proceedings w
• United States v. Baldarrama
  566 F.2d 560· 5th Cir.· 1978-01-20 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy and aiding and abetting, and that the admission of a prior conviction was proper for showing identity. The court also found no reversible error in other evidentiary or procedural claims.
• United States v. Joseph D. Beasley, M.D.
  550 F.2d 261· 5th Cir.· 1977-04-08 ·cited 68×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no merit in the appellants' numerous assignments of error regarding the indictment's sufficiency, grand jury proceedings, disclosure of evidence, witness immunity, continuance requests, and federal jurisdiction over false claims submitt
• Keto v. United States
  189 F.2d 247· 8th Cir.· 1951-05-08 ·cited 68×
  A sentence is not subject to collateral attack based on a defective indictment or information unless exceptional circumstances demonstrate the sentencing court manifestly lacked jurisdiction.
• Noble v. State
  68 Fla. 1· Fla.· 1914-06-17 ·cited 68×
  Noble was convicted of practicing dentistry without a certificate from the Florida State Board of Dental Examiners. On writ of error, the Florida Supreme Court upheld the conviction, rejecting constitutional challenges to the licensing statute and finding the indictment adequate.
• United States v. Sullivan
  919 F.2d 1403· 10th Cir.· 1990-11-16 ·cited 67×
  The evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to conclude Mary Sullivan 'used' a firearm during the commission of a felony, satisfying 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1).
• Stanfill v. State
  384 So. 2d 141· Fla.· 1980-04-03 ·cited 67×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict among district courts regarding whether section 316.027 creates one or two crimes for leaving the scene of an accident. The Court held that the statute creates only a single felony offense of 'willfully' leaving the scene, and remande
• State v. Davis
  243 So. 2d 587· Fla.· 1971-01-20 ·cited 67×
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld a trial court's dismissal of criminal charges against a former justice of the peace charged with embezzlement and larceny, holding that trial courts may consider a statement of particulars and factual matters at a motion to dismiss hearing to dete
• United States v. Serino
  835 F.2d 924· 1st Cir.· 1987-12-21 ·cited 66×
  The court affirmed the mail fraud convictions but remanded for further proceedings regarding sentencing due to the district court's failure to comply with procedural rules for addressing disputed facts in the presentence report.
• United States v. Bearden
  423 F.2d 805· 5th Cir.· 1970-03-03 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the defendant received a fair trial and that the district court did not err in its rulings regarding pre-trial motions, jury selection, evidence admission, or the sufficiency of the indictment.
• Cratty v. United States
  163 F.2d 844· D.C. Cir.· 1947-06-09 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the indictment was not defective, the trial court did not err in failing to instruct the jury on the credibility of an informer without a request, and entrapment was not established as a matter of law for either defendant.
• Clifton v. State
  76 Fla. 244· Fla.· 1918-08-12 ·cited 66×
  William L. Clifton, the Superintendent of Public Instruction for Polk County, was convicted of obtaining money from the county under false pretenses for misrepresenting the salary of a stenographer to the Board of Public Instruction. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the convict
• United States v. Anderson
  481 F.2d 685· 4th Cir.· 1973-06-26 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the defendants' various pre-trial motions for discovery and disclosure were properly denied as they sought overly broad discovery beyond the scope of applicable rules and were not supported by a showing of particularized need. The court also affirmed the admis
• United States v. August Edward Schartner, Jr.
  426 F.2d 470· 3d Cir.· 1970-03-05 ·cited 64×
• Jones v. United States
  342 F.2d 863· D.C. Cir.· 1964-07-16 ·cited 64×·via Indictment Validity
  Confessions obtained during illegal detention are inadmissible, and indictments obtained in violation of constitutional rights, including the right to counsel and privilege against self-incrimination, must be dismissed.
• United States v. Achtner
  144 F.2d 49· 2d Cir.· 1944-07-10 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and the conviction was proper, as the defendant's false representation of citizenship to a private employer violated the statute.
• Mosby Finch and Ralph Stokes v. State
  116 Fla. 437· Fla.· 1934-09-10 ·cited 64×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a conviction for kidnapping for ransom, holding that the trial court erred by misinstructing the jury on the essential elements of the crime and by excluding evidence relevant to the victim's alleged motive for fabricating the kidnapping. The de
• Baeumel v. State
  26 Fla. 71· Fla.· 1890-01-01 ·cited 64×
  This case addresses whether an indictment for selling liquor without a license must explicitly state the defendant is not a druggist. The court held that exceptions for druggists are matters of defense, not elements of the crime that must be pleaded in the indictment. The convict
• United States v. Miller
  771 F.2d 1219· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-16 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the Sherman Act is not unconstitutionally vague as applied to price-fixing, the indictment was sufficient, the grand jury composition challenge failed, and Jencks Act violations were harmless errors.
• Hall v. United States
  410 F.2d 653· 4th Cir.· 1969-05-13 ·cited 63×
  The court held that the 1962 sentencing was valid and the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing further psychiatric examination, and that the indictment was sufficient to charge an offense.
• United States v. Tavelman
  650 F.2d 1133· 9th Cir.· 1981-07-13 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the indictments were sufficient, searches were lawful, and codefendants' statements were admissible. However, special parole terms imposed under 21 U.S.C. § 846 were improper.
• Roberts v. State
  164 So. 2d 817· Fla.· 1964-03-06 ·cited 62×
  John Henry Roberts and John Alfred Adderley were convicted of first degree murder for killing a grocery store owner during a robbery. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed their convictions and death sentences, rejecting numerous challenges to the admission of confessions, ballistic
• Alton T. Milam v. United States
  322 F.2d 104· 5th Cir.· 1963-08-29 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support Milam's conviction for mail fraud, but sufficient to support the convictions of Kimball and Sprague. The indictment was found to be sufficient.
• VAN Liew v. United States
  321 F.2d 664· 5th Cir.· 1963-08-05 ·cited 62×
  An indictment must state specific facts constituting the offense, not just recite statutory language, to adequately inform the defendant and satisfy constitutional requirements.
• Dock Perry Glenn and William M. Belvin v. United States
  303 F.2d 536· 5th Cir.· 1962-05-25 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the indictments were sufficient, cross-examination was not improperly restricted, evidence was sufficient, and defendants were not deprived of their right to counsel.