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

• Obie Wilson Stapleton v. United States
  260 F.2d 415· 9th Cir.· 1958-10-22 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the indictment was legally sufficient and that the trial court did not err in its rulings or instructions, leading to an affirmation of the conviction.
• Rolland v. United States
  200 F.2d 678· 5th Cir.· 1953-01-06 ·cited 38×
• Warren v. United States
  177 F.2d 596· 10th Cir.· 1949-10-31 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the defendant's counseling of another to evade Selective Service registration, despite his religious beliefs, violated the Act and was not protected by the First Amendment.
• Elliott v. State
  77 Fla. 611· Fla.· 1919-05-12 ·cited 38×
  Robert Elliott and Eulie Russell were convicted of obtaining money under false pretenses, with Russell charged as an aider and abettor. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed Elliott's conviction but reversed Russell's conviction because the indictment alleged his aiding acts occurre
• United States v. Tarresse Leonard
  4 F.4th 1134· 11th Cir.· 2021-07-08 ·cited 37×
  An indictment that omits the knowledge-of-felon-status element required by 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) does not deprive the court of jurisdiction and any such omission is subject to harmless-error review.
• United States v. Rumney
  867 F.2d 714· 1st Cir.· 1989-02-08 ·cited 37×·via Indictment Requirements
  The court held that the provision for heightened penalties for thrice-convicted felons possessing firearms is a sentence enhancement, not an element of a crime, and that alleged omissions from a warrant affidavit were not material to probable cause.
• Epifanio G. Alvarez v. Estelle
  531 F.2d 1319· 5th Cir.· 1976-05-24 ·cited 37×
  A retrial after a successful appeal based on an insufficient indictment does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause, and prosecutorial arguments, even if potentially improper, do not render a trial fundamentally unfair unless so prejudicial as to violate due process.
• Visente M. Flores v. United States
  338 F.2d 966· 10th Cir.· 1964-12-01 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the indictment was not fatally defective and sufficiently apprised the appellant of the charges.
• Peckham v. United States
  210 F.2d 693· D.C. Cir.· 1953-11-19 ·cited 37×
  The court held that while the trial judge's conduct and comments may have created a disorderly atmosphere, the acquittal on one count and the strength of the evidence on the other count, along with adequate jury instructions, meant the defendant was not necessarily deprived of a
• United States v. Davern
  970 F.2d 1490· 6th Cir.· 1992-07-21 ·cited 36×·via Indictment Specificity
  The court errs in narrowly prescribing factors district courts may consider in sentencing, misinterpreting Congress's language regarding the sentencing guidelines.
• United States v. DI Fonzo
  603 F.2d 1260· 7th Cir.· 1979-08-02 ·cited 36×
  False statements submitted to the SEC during an investigation are within the agency's jurisdiction for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 1001, even if the SEC's regulatory authority over the specific activities was not definitively settled.
• United States v. Barnett Guthartz
  573 F.2d 225· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-18 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and there was no fatal variance between the indictment and the proof, nor was the false statement immaterial.
• United States v. Roya
  574 F.2d 386· 7th Cir.· 1978-04-14 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the indictment was not vague and the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for dispensing controlled substances outside the usual course of professional practice.
• United States v. Largent
  545 F.2d 1039· 6th Cir.· 1976-12-13 ·cited 36×·via Vagueness Of Indictment
  The court held that the defendants' Sixth Amendment speedy trial rights were not violated, the statutes under which they were convicted are constitutional, and the admission of prior similar acts evidence was proper.
• United States v. Clark
  412 F.2d 885· 5th Cir.· 1969-05-23 ·cited 36×
  The court held that failure to appear before a probation officer does not constitute a violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 3150, as a probation officer is not a 'judicial officer' as defined by the Bail Reform Act.
• United States v. Salliey
  360 F.2d 699· 4th Cir.· 1966-03-16 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the jury instructions were proper, and the pre-trial procedures were lawful, affirming the conviction.
• United States v. Chunn
  347 F.2d 717· 4th Cir.· 1965-06-02 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the indictment was not fatally defective and that there was sufficient evidence to sustain the convictions for assaulting a person assisting federal officers.
• Ramirez v. United States
  318 F.2d 155· 9th Cir.· 1963-05-21 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the indictment's allegations of willful misapplication, including distributing loan proceeds to unintended recipients, sufficiently stated an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 656, even without explicitly stating "intent to injure or defraud."
• Martin v. United States
  285 F.2d 150· 10th Cir.· 1960-11-16 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient and the sentences were clearly imposed consecutively, affirming the denial of the motion to vacate.
• United States v. Allegrucci
  258 F.2d 70· 3d Cir.· 1958-07-16 ·cited 36×
  The court held that jury instructions stating possession of recently stolen goods casts a burden of explanation on the defendant, and that the indictment's description of the theft location was sufficiently specific, constituted prejudicial error requiring a new trial.
• Webb v. United States
  191 F.2d 512· 10th Cir.· 1951-09-06 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, discovery requests were properly handled, and the admission of evidence and closing arguments were not grounds for reversal.
• Eagleston v. United States
  172 F.2d 194· 9th Cir.· 1949-01-07 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the evidence supported the jury's verdict of assault with a dangerous weapon, and that the trial court did not err in its instructions or evidentiary rulings.
• Rose v. United States
  149 F.2d 755· 9th Cir.· 1945-06-04 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient to charge conspiracy, the trial court did not err in denying motions for bills of particulars or in its rulings on evidence, and the Second War Powers Act is constitutional.
• Mitchell v. United States
  143 F.2d 953· 10th Cir.· 1944-07-13 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion, the evidence was sufficient to sustain the verdict, and the entrapment defense was not applicable.
• United States v. Kushner
  135 F.2d 668· 2d Cir.· 1943-05-05 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the conviction under 19 U.S.C.A. § 1593(a) must be reversed because it requires an intent to defraud the revenue, which was not sufficiently proven. However, convictions under other counts were affirmed.
• Estabrook v. King
  119 F.2d 607· 8th Cir.· 1941-05-06 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the district court properly denied the petitioner's habeas corpus applications, affirming the denial of release from the hospital for defective delinquents.
• D'Alessandro v. State
  114 Fla. 70· Fla.· 1934-02-27 ·cited 36×
  D'Alessandro was indicted for possessing lottery tickets (Bolita) but the indictment did not allege that the tickets represented a live interest in a lottery yet to be played. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction, holding that the indictment failed to charge a comple
• Craft v. State
  42 Fla. 567· Fla.· 1900-06-01 ·cited 36×
  William Craft was convicted of perjury for allegedly giving false testimony before a grand jury. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the conviction, holding that while perjury before a grand jury constitutes perjury in a judicial proceeding, the indictment was fatally defective fo
• Pittman v. State
  25 Fla. 648· Fla.· 1889-06-01 ·cited 36×
  Edward Pittman was convicted of aggravated assault after being indicted for assault with intent to murder. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that a defendant indicted for assault with intent to murder may be convicted of the lesser included offense of agg
• Lincoln v. Franklin Y.K. Sunn
  807 F.2d 805· 9th Cir.· 1987-01-06 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying habeas corpus relief without an evidentiary hearing and lacked sufficient findings to affirm the denial. The court reversed and remanded for further proceedings on prosecutorial misconduct and notice issues.
• United States v. Crooks
  804 F.2d 1441· 9th Cir.· 1986-11-25 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the Speedy Trial Act was not violated, collateral estoppel did not bar the conspiracy conviction, the evidence was sufficient, and convictions did not violate due process.
• United States v. Tham
  665 F.2d 855· 9th Cir.· 1981-10-05 ·cited 35×·via Indictment Validity
  The court held that the district judge did not err in jury instructions, refusing to disclose a confidential informant's identity, or in handling allegations of prosecutorial misconduct. The court affirmed the conviction.
• Dowling Bros. Distilling Co. v. United States
  153 F.2d 353· 6th Cir.· 1946-02-08 ·cited 35×
  The court held that the order denying a stay of proceedings was not immediately appealable, and that the defendants' failure to file a timely protest with the Administrator, their constitutional arguments, and their claims of ignorance did not constitute good faith or a reasonabl
• Craig v. State
  95 Fla. 374· Fla.· 1928-02-25 ·cited 35×
  Oscar Craig was convicted of embezzling $162.22 from the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company through a scheme of marking incorrect mileages on ticket stubs and pocketing the difference. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed his conviction, rejecting his arguments that the trial cou
• United States v. Payne
  940 F.2d 286· 8th Cir.· 1991-06-28 ·cited 34×·via Indictment Requirements
  The court held that defendants' sentences were improperly enhanced based on crack cocaine amounts not charged in the indictment or proven at trial.
• United States v. De La Rosa
  911 F.2d 985· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-29 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the Federal Kidnapping Act applies to abductions outside the U.S. transported into the U.S., the evidence was sufficient, the Batson challenge was properly denied, prosecutorial arguments were not reversible error, and the senten
• United States v. Campos-Asencio
  822 F.2d 506· 5th Cir.· 1987-07-09 ·cited 34×
  The court held that a recent Supreme Court decision allows collateral attacks on prior deportation orders in illegal reentry prosecutions, requiring remand for reconsideration of the defendant's claims regarding counsel at his deportation hearing.
• United States v. Kilpatrick
  821 F.2d 1456· 10th Cir.· 1987-06-18 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficiently precise and that prosecutorial misconduct did not warrant dismissal because it did not significantly infringe upon the grand jury's independent judgment or threaten fundamental fairness.
• United States v. Dougherty
  810 F.2d 763· 8th Cir.· 1987-01-28 ·cited 34×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that prosecutorial misconduct did not prejudice the defendant due to curative instructions and overwhelming evidence, entrapment was not established as a matter of law, and the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
• United States v. Maggitt
  784 F.2d 590· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-06 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was legally sufficient to support the convictions for witness tampering and retaliation, and that any misjoinder of defendants was harmless error. The indictment was also found to be sufficient and not multiplicious.
• United States v. McCOMB
  744 F.2d 555· 7th Cir.· 1984-08-31 ·cited 34×
  The court held that fabricating records after receiving a grand jury subpoena constitutes an endeavor to obstruct justice, and that false statements made to a grand jury are material if they have the potential to impede the investigation.
• United States v. Hultgren
  713 F.2d 79· 5th Cir.· 1983-08-11 ·cited 34×
  The court held that warrantless arrests and searches within a third party's home were justified by exigent circumstances, and that the indictments sufficiently stated the operative time periods for the alleged conspiracies.
• Cramer v. Fahner
  683 F.2d 1376· 7th Cir.· 1982-06-30 ·cited 34×
  The court held that replaying tapes for the jury during deliberations, after initially denying their request, prejudiced the petitioner and violated his constitutional right to a fair trial.
• United States v. Bean
  564 F.2d 700· 5th Cir.· 1977-12-09 ·cited 34×
  A district court judge has discretion to reject a plea bargain if it is contrary to the public interest, and this discretion is not subject to stringent appellate review unless it constitutes a gross abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Smith
  552 F.2d 257· 8th Cir.· 1977-04-05 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient for the jury, the indictment was valid, and the defendant's rights were not violated by discovery procedures or delays.
• United States v. Carter Camp
  541 F.2d 737· 8th Cir.· 1976-09-02 ·cited 34×
  An indictment is insufficient if it omits an essential element of the offense, even if the statute is cited and the jury is properly instructed.
• United States v. Fistel
  460 F.2d 157· 2d Cir.· 1972-05-17 ·cited 34×
  The court held that an indictment, though defective for omitting an essential element, can survive a post-trial challenge if the case was tried with a clear understanding of the required elements and no prejudice to the defendant.
• United States v. Mitman
  459 F.2d 451· 9th Cir.· 1972-04-20 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient as to Counts I and II because it adequately informed the defendant of the charges and protected against double jeopardy, and that the evidence supported the conviction.
• United States v. Levine
  457 F.2d 1186· 10th Cir.· 1972-02-22 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently charged a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1952 by alleging defendants 'caused' interstate travel, and that voluntary guilty pleas waived non-jurisdictional defects.
• United States v. Thomas
  444 F.2d 919· D.C. Cir.· 1971-04-26 ·cited 34×
  An indictment for first-degree burglary under D.C. Code § 22-1801(a) must specify the particular criminal offense the defendant intended to commit upon entry; an indictment merely alleging intent to commit 'a criminal offense' is defective. However, such a defective indictment ma