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

• Avalo Allison Fisher v. United States
  231 F.2d 99· 9th Cir.· 1956-02-15 ·cited 62×
  The court held that the trial court erred in excluding certain evidence and in its jury instructions regarding the definitions of 'membership' and 'affiliation,' necessitating reversal.
• Mose Penny v. State
  140 Fla. 155· Fla.· 1939-09-29 ·cited 62×·via Indictment Requirements
  Mose Penny was indicted as an accessory before the fact to murder but convicted by jury of murder in the second degree as a co-principal. The Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding that a defendant cannot be convicted of an offense different from that charged in the indictment,
• Tilly v. State
  21 Fla. 242· Fla.· 1885-01-01 ·cited 62×
  Charles Tilly was convicted of unlawfully entering a building with intent to commit a misdemeanor under Florida Statute Chapter 3468 (1883). On appeal, the Florida Supreme Court upheld the conviction, rejecting challenges to the indictment's form and the admission of evidence.
• Lehman v. Sawyer
  106 Fla. 396· Fla.· 1932-08-06 ·cited 61×
  Alfred Sawyer sought habeas corpus relief challenging his detention under a criminal information charging him with unlawfully catching fish using improper equipment in Florida waters. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the circuit court's discharge order, holding that habeas corp
• Sloan v. State
  70 Fla. 163· Fla.· 1915-07-13 ·cited 61×
  Ed Sloan was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for shooting and killing Rosa Harris during an attempted robbery. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction because the trial court improperly refused to give a jury instruction on second-degree murder,
• United States v. Buckley
  689 F.2d 893· 9th Cir.· 1982-10-08 ·cited 60×
  An indictment is sufficient if it provides a minimally adequate description of the charge enabling the defendant to prepare a defense and plead double jeopardy, even if the falsity of a mailed document is only implicitly alleged.
• United States v. Cincotta
  689 F.2d 238· 1st Cir.· 1982-08-04 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendants, the indictment was not defective, and the trial court did not err in admitting evidence or in its jury instructions.
• United States v. Hobson
  519 F.2d 765· 9th Cir.· 1975-06-26 ·cited 60×·via Indictment Requirements
  The court held that defendants' scienter regarding the federal nature of the offense was not required, escape from a state facility designated by the Attorney General constituted escape from federal custody, and evidence was properly admitted. The court affirmed the convictions.
• United States v. Huff
  512 F.2d 66· 5th Cir.· 1975-04-28 ·cited 60×
  The court held that Count II of the indictment was fatally defective because it failed to allege a crime, and an ex parte memorandum submitted by the prosecution to the sentencing judge constituted a prejudicial and impermissible communication.
• Braswell v. United States
  224 F.2d 706· 10th Cir.· 1955-07-01 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, a prior conviction with a suspended sentence qualified under the statute, and the evidence was properly admitted and corroborated.
• Rose v. United States
  128 F.2d 622· 10th Cir.· 1942-05-19 ·cited 60×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in overruling the demurrer to the indictment, denying the motion for a bill of particulars, or in its evidentiary rulings and sentencing.
• Kirkland v. State
  86 Fla. 64· Fla.· 1923-06-20 ·cited 60×·via Indictment Requirements
  Kirkland, a Jackson County Commissioner, was convicted of embezzling public funds and property under his official custody. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that a County Commissioner who lawfully receives county property by virtue of his office has a dut
• Dickens v. State
  50 Fla. 17· Fla.· 1905-06-01 ·cited 60×
  Joe Dickens was convicted of first-degree murder in the death of Charley Ely and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting challenges to the indictment's sufficiency, the admission of footprint evidence obtained withou
• Smith v. State
  29 Fla. 408· Fla.· 1892-01-01 ·cited 60×
  Henry C. Smith was convicted of forging a school warrant by altering its amount from $3 to $30. On appeal, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that school warrants are proper subjects of forgery statutes and that circumstantial evidence of Smith's guilt was
• United States v. Salazar
  485 F.2d 1272· 2d Cir.· 1973-09-19 ·cited 59×
  The court held that the defendant's conviction for participating in a heroin conspiracy was not undermined by evidence of transactions he was unaware of, nor by alleged procedural errors in trial preparation, summation, or sentencing.
• United States v. Garner
  529 F.2d 962· 6th Cir.· 1976-02-12 ·cited 58×
  The court held that misstating the statute in an indictment is not grounds for dismissal if the defendant is not misled and the facts alleged constitute a crime under a valid statute. It also held that a delay in trial, while significant, did not violate speedy trial rights when
• United States v. Cluchette
  465 F.2d 749· 9th Cir.· 1972-08-08 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, jury instructions were adequate, admissions were voluntary, and sentencing was not an abuse of discretion.
• Bland v. United States
  299 F.2d 105· 5th Cir.· 1962-02-01 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the trial judge's failure to reinstruct the jury on the essential elements of knowledge and intent, after the jury requested a re-reading of the statute, constituted reversible error.
• Reeves v. State
  29 Fla. 527· Fla.· 1892-01-01 ·cited 58×
  Frank Reeves was convicted of larceny of a hog in Wakulla County, Florida. On appeal, the Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction due to the trial court's error in refusing a proper jury instruction on reasonable doubt and the presumption of innocence, despite finding the p
• Green W. Hodge v. State
  26 Fla. 11· Fla.· 1890-01-01 ·cited 58×
  Green Hodge was convicted of murdering his brother-in-law Jesse Marlow by shooting. On writ of error, the Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction because the trial court erroneously instructed the jury that the defendant must prove insanity beyond a reasonable doubt, rather
• United States v. Dario Dicesare
  765 F.2d 890· 9th Cir.· 1985-07-10 ·cited 57×·via Indictment Specificity
  The court held that the use of a trained canine to sniff the interior of a private residence constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment.
• United States v. Miller
  491 F.2d 638· 5th Cir.· 1974-03-18 ·cited 57×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing counts of the indictment and suppressing evidence, reversing the dismissal and suppression orders.
• Barnes v. Hunter
  188 F.2d 86· 10th Cir.· 1951-03-21 ·cited 57×
  A federal prisoner seeking relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 cannot pursue a habeas corpus petition if the sentencing court has already considered and denied the § 2255 motion, unless the § 2255 remedy is inadequate or ineffective.
• Smith v. State
  72 Fla. 449· Fla.· 1916-12-12 ·cited 57×
  Ruth Smith was indicted for the murder of J. H. Goudy after stabbing him with a knife. She was convicted of manslaughter and filed a motion in arrest of judgment claiming the indictment was fatally defective for allegedly charging that she killed herself and for failing to allege
• United States v. Keck
  773 F.2d 759· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-30 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the indictment was not defective, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying severance, admitting transcripts with speaker identities, or admitting certain conversations, and the jury instructions were proper.
• United States v. Eloy Salazar
  720 F.2d 1482· 10th Cir.· 1983-11-04 ·cited 56×
  The court held that 7 U.S.C. § 2024(b) is not unconstitutionally vague, the indictment was sufficient, the defendant was not subject to selective prosecution, and the government's conduct was not outrageous.
• United States v. McCOWN
  711 F.2d 1441· 9th Cir.· 1983-08-02 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions were not violated by the Speedy Trial Act, that severance was not required, and that the indictment and evidence admitted were proper.
• United States v. Crocker
  568 F.2d 1049· 3d Cir.· 1977-11-29 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of other crimes, not charged in the indictment and not discussed in the grand jury testimony, amounted to a constructive amendment of the indictment, requiring a new trial.
• United States v. London
  550 F.2d 206· 5th Cir.· 1977-04-06 ·cited 56×
  An indictment charging concealment by trick, scheme, or device under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 is sufficient if it tracks the statutory language and adequately apprises the defendants of the charges, even if it does not specify the precise trick, scheme, or device.
• United States v. Chestnut
  533 F.2d 40· 2d Cir.· 1976-03-08 ·cited 56×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that venue was proper in New York, the indictment was sufficient, and the evidence supported the jury's finding of willfulness.
• United States v. Driscoll
  454 F.2d 792· 5th Cir.· 1972-01-17 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the jury charge on fraudulent intent impermissibly shifted the burden of proof to the defendant, and that the defendant was sentenced on too many counts. The court reversed the conviction and sentence.
• Forrest Etheridge Honea v. United States
  344 F.2d 798· 5th Cir.· 1965-04-28 ·cited 56×
  The court held that an indictment under 18 U.S.C.A. § 912 for demanding or obtaining money while falsely impersonating a federal officer is fatally defective if it fails to allege intent to defraud.
• United States v. Pearce
  275 F.2d 318· 7th Cir.· 1960-02-29 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the search warrant affidavit was insufficient to establish probable cause because it relied on hearsay from an unreliable and undisclosed source, rendering the subsequent search and seizure unlawful. Additionally, count 2 of the indictment was fatally defectiv
• United States v. Varlack
  225 F.2d 665· 2d Cir.· 1955-08-25 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the Hobbs Act prohibits extortion through fear of economic loss, not just physical violence, and that the indictment and jury instructions were sufficient. Venue was proper in New York.
• Schino v. United States
  209 F.2d 67· 9th Cir.· 1953-12-02 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in its rulings on the indictment, bill of particulars, continuance, prosecutor's argument, sufficiency of evidence, excluded evidence, or jury instructions, and affirmed the convictions.
• Hopper v. United States
  142 F.2d 181· 9th Cir.· 1943-12-06 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to quash the indictment or in denying the motion for a directed verdict.
• United States v. Gillies
  851 F.2d 492· 1st Cir.· 1988-07-07 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the statute prohibiting felons from possessing firearms applies to a gun that has previously traveled in interstate commerce, even if the interstate travel occurred before the current law was enacted. The court also found the indictment sufficient and the prio
• State v. Theron Black
  385 So. 2d 1372· Fla.· 1980-07-10 ·cited 55×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a grand jury indictment is fundamentally defective and cannot sustain a conviction when it fails to allege the place where the crime occurred, even if this defect is subsequently cured by a bill of particulars and venue is proven at trial. The
• Marshall v. United States
  355 F.2d 999· 9th Cir.· 1966-01-27 ·cited 55×·via Indictment Specificity
  The court held that 18 U.S.C. § 1952(b)(2) applies to single acts of extortion and that the trial court did not err in denying motions for mistrial due to publicity or in its handling of a juror's undisclosed badge status.
• Burnes v. State
  89 Fla. 494· Fla.· 1925-06-05 ·cited 55×
  This case reviews a conviction for breaking and entering. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding that neither the indictment's endorsement nor the sustaining of a demurrer to a plea of autrefois acquit constituted reversible error.
• United States v. Doherty
  867 F.2d 47· 1st Cir.· 1989-02-01 ·cited 54×
  The court held that although the jury instructions on mail fraud were erroneous under McNally v. United States, the errors were harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the evidence established guilt for defrauding the government of money or property.
• United States v. Young
  618 F.2d 1281· 8th Cir.· 1980-04-09 ·cited 54×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the indictment was sufficient, the government complied with Brady obligations, the trial venue and jury selection were proper, the prosecutor's comment was not grounds for a mistrial, similar acts evidence was admissible, the 'on or
• United States v. Wander
  601 F.2d 1251· 3d Cir.· 1979-06-27 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the interstate travel and use of facilities were too casual and incidental to establish federal jurisdiction under the Travel Act for the alleged extortion scheme.
• United States v. Howell
  240 F.2d 149· 3d Cir.· 1956-12-28 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the search and seizure were lawful, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions for severance, mistrial, or new trial.
• Elwert v. United States
  231 F.2d 928· 9th Cir.· 1956-03-22 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and the evidence supported the conviction for tax evasion, and that the jury instructions, when considered as a whole, were adequate.
• Malatkofski v. United States
  179 F.2d 905· 1st Cir.· 1950-01-25 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the indictments were sufficient, the denial of severance motions was proper, and the trial court did not commit reversible error in its rulings on evidence or jury instructions.
• Taylor v. United States
  179 F.2d 640· 9th Cir.· 1950-01-19 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the trial court correctly denied the motion to vacate sentence, dismissed the habeas corpus petitions, and that the indictment sufficiently charged a violation of the relevant statute.
• United States v. O'Brien
  174 F.2d 341· 7th Cir.· 1949-05-03 ·cited 54×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction of O'Brien, but sufficient to sustain the conviction of Keating for possession of stolen goods from an interstate shipment.
• Wolf v. State
  72 Fla. 572· Fla.· 1917-01-08 ·cited 54×
  Tom Wolf was convicted of willfully and maliciously administering poison to cattle belonging to Josiah Richardson. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction because the trial court erroneously admitted highly prejudicial hearsay evidence of threats made by Wolf's employer
• Robinson v. State
  69 Fla. 521· Fla.· 1915-04-27 ·cited 54×
  Carrie Robinson was convicted of murdering her newborn child by strangulation and sentenced to life imprisonment. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed her conviction, holding that the indictment adequately alleged the manner of death despite not using the specific term "mortal woun