Variance Between Indictment And Proof

750 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 59 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Sol C. Schwartz
  785 F.2d 673· 9th Cir.· 1986-03-14 ·cited 45×
  The court held that an appeal of an acquittal based on insufficient evidence is barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause, but an appeal of a dismissal based on a legal ruling not dependent on guilt or innocence is permissible. The court also held that 'thing of value' under 18 U.S.C.
• United States v. ARD
  731 F.2d 718· 11th Cir.· 1984-05-03 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the appellants' convictions were supported by sufficient evidence and that their various challenges, including those related to search and seizure, sufficiency of evidence, variance, conflict of interest, co-conspirator statements, cross-examination, presentat
• United States v. Boucher
  796 F.2d 972· 7th Cir.· 1986-07-21 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the admission of co-conspirator statements was proper under Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E) and that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction.
• United States v. Smith
  789 F.2d 196· 3d Cir.· 1986-04-28 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the jury instructions regarding conspiracy, Travel Act violations, and the use of an eleven-person jury were proper, and that the denial of access to alcoholism treatment records was justified.
• United States v. Cochran
  697 F.2d 600· 5th Cir.· 1983-01-24 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the admission of co-conspirators' statements, the variance between the indictment and proof, the jury's viewing of an inadmissible transcript, nondisclosure of certain materials, prosecutorial remarks, and the admission of photographs did not constitute revers
• United States v. Beery
  678 F.2d 856· 10th Cir.· 1982-05-14 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the defendant's claim of immunity violation was sufficiently raised and required a remand for the district court to determine if his compelled bankruptcy testimony was used, directly or indirectly, in the criminal proceedings.
• United States v. Morris
  623 F.2d 145· 10th Cir.· 1980-06-16 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the admission of certain evidence, even if potentially inadmissible, was not reversible error because the jury was properly instructed and the defendant failed to object. The court also held that the jury selection method used did not impair the defendant's ri
• United States v. Scott
  555 F.2d 522· 5th Cir.· 1977-07-11 ·cited 44×
  The court affirmed the convictions, finding no reversible error in the pre-trial rulings, trial conduct, or the substance of the convictions.
• Heisler v. United States
  394 F.2d 692· 9th Cir.· 1968-04-26 ·cited 44×
  The court held that a variance between the indictment and proof regarding the denomination of a counterfeit note was harmless error, and the subsequent amendment order was a nullity that did not invalidate the conviction.
• Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. United States
  260 F.2d 397· 4th Cir.· 1958-10-06 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdict that PPG was a party to the conspiracy and that the trial court's rulings on evidence and jury instructions were not erroneous.
• Duke v. United States
  233 F.2d 897· 5th Cir.· 1956-05-25 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict most defendants of conspiracy but insufficient to convict Sheriff Fiveash, who was only shown to have engaged in ensnarement.
• Baker v. United States
  156 F.2d 386· 5th Cir.· 1946-07-10 ·cited 44×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a finding of one general conspiracy, and any potential errors were either harmless, corrected, or did not affect substantial rights, thus affirming the convictions.
• Nigro v. United States
  117 F.2d 624· 8th Cir.· 1941-02-04 ·cited 44×
• Rose v. State
  507 So. 2d 630· Fla. 5th DCA· 1987-04-09 ·cited 43×
  Reginald Rose was charged with attempted armed robbery of Alice Andrews, but the State presented evidence only of attempted armed robbery of Nathaniel Andrews. The trial court denied Rose's motion for judgment of acquittal and allowed the State to amend the charging information m
• United States v. Snider
  720 F.2d 985· 8th Cir.· 1983-11-14 ·cited 43×
  A prejudicial variance between the indictment charging a single conspiracy and the proof at trial demonstrating multiple conspiracies requires reversal of the conspiracy convictions. However, convictions for possession with intent to distribute are affirmed if the evidence is str
• United States v. DiFRANCESCO
  604 F.2d 769· 2d Cir.· 1979-08-06 ·cited 43×
  The dangerous special offender statute, 18 U.S.C. § 3576, does not apply when the underlying felony statute permits a sentence equal to or exceeding the maximum term allowed by the special offender statute.
• United States v. Auerbach
  913 F.2d 407· 7th Cir.· 1990-09-17 ·cited 42×
  The court held that Auerbach's involvement in the drug conspiracy made him liable under the Travel Act for co-conspirators' interstate travel, and that Helish's convictions for conspiracy and possession were supported by sufficient evidence despite minor variances in the indictme
• United States v. Richard Rodney Robison (89-3724)
  904 F.2d 365· 6th Cir.· 1990-06-01 ·cited 42×·via Variance From Indictment
  The court affirmed Smoot's conviction but vacated the sentences of both defendants, remanding for resentencing.
• United States v. Jones
  880 F.2d 55· 8th Cir.· 1989-07-07 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the admission of prior convictions and bad acts was proper, the denial of reopening evidence was within the trial court's discretion, joinder and severance of charges and defendants were appropriate, and the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions.
• United States v. Davis
  838 F.2d 909· 7th Cir.· 1988-01-25 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction and that the admission of 'other acts' evidence and testimony regarding co-conspirators' convictions was proper.
• United States v. Rosen
  764 F.2d 763· 11th Cir.· 1985-07-01 ·cited 42×
  The court held that while convictions for conspiracy, attempt, and importation were supported by sufficient evidence, the statutory maximum sentences for certain counts were exceeded, requiring resentencing.
• United States v. Harris
  733 F.2d 994· 2d Cir.· 1984-04-13 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support convictions for attempting to possess heroin with intent to distribute, but sufficient for conspiracy to distribute heroin. The exclusion of defense testimony regarding the defendant's state of mind was an error requiri
• United States v. Gomberg
  715 F.2d 843· 3d Cir.· 1983-08-30 ·cited 42×
  A conspiracy count is not duplicitous for having multiple objectives, and a defendant convicted of a continuing criminal enterprise should not receive separate sentences for conspiracy and underlying predicate offenses.
• Johnson v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  704 F.2d 232· 5th Cir.· 1983-05-06 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the claim of ineffective assistance of counsel without an evidentiary hearing, as the allegations, if true, could establish a constitutional violation.
• United States v. Camiel
  689 F.2d 31· 3d Cir.· 1982-09-07 ·cited 42×
  The court held that a variance between a single mail fraud scheme charged in the indictment and proof of multiple schemes prejudiced the defendants' substantial rights, and acquittal was the proper remedy.
• United States v. Lentz
  624 F.2d 1280· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-25 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict regarding the 'wire communication' element and that the defendants' claims of entrapment, due process violations, evidentiary errors, and indictment issues were without merit.
• United States v. Griffin
  464 F.2d 1352· 9th Cir.· 1972-07-05 ·cited 42×
  The court held that pre-indictment delay did not violate speedy trial rights and that any variance between the indictment and proof of conspiracy was rendered harmless by a jury instruction. Denial of severance was also affirmed.
• United States v. Cordell Cassell
  452 F.2d 533· 7th Cir.· 1971-10-06 ·cited 42×
  The court affirmed the convictions of Cassell and Rice, finding no reversible error, but reversed Jackson's conviction due to the improper admission of his confession and handwriting exemplar obtained in violation of Miranda.
• United States v. Gower
  447 F.2d 187· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-01 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the defendant's various contentions regarding the grand jury process, continuance denial, pre-trial motions, juror qualification, judicial conduct, sufficiency of evidence, and variance between indictment and proof were without merit.
• United States v. Nirvana Ward Zuideveld and Jack Zuideveld
  316 F.2d 873· 7th Cir.· 1963-05-01 ·cited 42×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the conviction for conspiracy to use the United States mails for the transmission of obscene materials, and that the trial was free from prejudicial error.
• Daily v. United States
  282 F.2d 818· 9th Cir.· 1960-09-02 ·cited 42×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict Ribero of participating in a single overall conspiracy, but insufficient evidence to connect Quinn to that conspiracy, thus reversing his conviction.
• Marvin v. United States
  279 F.2d 451· 10th Cir.· 1960-06-03 ·cited 42×·via Fatal Variance Between Indictment And Proof
  The court held that 18 U.S.C.A. § 1341 defines a single offense of mail fraud, which can be committed in multiple ways, and that the indictment and proof did not present a fatal variance.
• United States v. Smolin
  182 F.2d 782· 2d Cir.· 1950-06-12 ·cited 42×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to convict the appellant of possessing stolen goods and conspiracy, and that his statements to the FBI agent were admissible as circumstantial evidence of guilt.
• Canella v. United States
  157 F.2d 470· 9th Cir.· 1946-09-16 ·cited 42×
  The court held that a variance between charging a single conspiracy and proving multiple conspiracies is fatal if it affects the substantial rights of the accused, particularly due to the "sheer difference in numbers" of conspiracies and defendants, leading to a risk of guilt tra
• United States v. Valera
  845 F.2d 923· 11th Cir.· 1988-05-20 ·cited 41×
  The court held that the defendant's claims of Brady, Giglio, and Jencks Act violations, impermissible variance, and witness immunity issues did not warrant reversal of his convictions.
• United States v. von Stoll
  726 F.2d 584· 9th Cir.· 1984-02-24 ·cited 41×
  A variance between the indictment and proof regarding the identity of the victim does not constitute a constructive amendment of the indictment if it does not affect the defendant's substantial rights. A confession requires corroboration, but the corroborating evidence need not i
• United States v. Johnson
  515 F.2d 730· 7th Cir.· 1975-05-09 ·cited 41×
  The dissenting judge holds that the trial judge erred by not severing the defendant or providing a cautionary instruction regarding evidence of a separate conspiracy, requiring reversal.
• United States v. Tarvers
  833 F.2d 1068· 1st Cir.· 1987-11-24 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the CCE statute does not require the jury to unanimously agree on the identities of the five subordinates, and that the indictment for conspiracy to impede the IRS was sufficiently specific.
• United States v. Starr
  816 F.2d 94· 2d Cir.· 1987-04-09 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to prove the defendants intended to defraud their customers, a necessary element for mail and wire fraud convictions.
• United States v. Brack
  747 F.2d 1142· 7th Cir.· 1984-10-31 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the indictment was sufficient, the evidence supported the conviction, and the defendant's procedural and due process arguments lacked merit.
• United States v. Tobin
  576 F.2d 687· 5th Cir.· 1978-07-17 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the government sufficiently proved interstate commerce movement and value over $5,000, and that the jury instruction on reasonable doubt, while not preferred, was not reversible error.
• United States v. Craig
  573 F.2d 513· 7th Cir.· 1978-03-22 ·cited 40×
  The court affirmed convictions for Hobbs Act extortion and mail fraud, holding that venue was proper, there was no fatal variance, the extortion affected interstate commerce, the use of mail was foreseeable, and the district court properly admitted evidence.
• United States v. Adamo
  534 F.2d 31· 3d Cir.· 1976-03-29 ·cited 40×
  The mailing of vouchers to credit card companies by merchants who knew the credit card users were using stolen cards is sufficiently related to the fraudulent scheme to violate the mail fraud statute.
• United States v. la Vecchia
  513 F.2d 1210· 2d Cir.· 1975-04-04 ·cited 40×
  The court held that while the evidence might not have been sufficient to prove Kurshenoff's participation in the single conspiracy charged, there was no prejudice to his substantial rights requiring reversal.
• United States v. Nickels
  502 F.2d 1173· 7th Cir.· 1974-09-12 ·cited 40×
  A police officer's false testimony before a grand jury, even if given under the duress of a police department rule or an over-warning by the prosecutor, is not excused and can be the basis for a perjury conviction.
• United States v. D'Anna
  450 F.2d 1201· 2d Cir.· 1971-10-27 ·cited 40×
  The court held that a variance between the indictment and proof was not fatal because the bill of particulars provided adequate notice and there was no risk of double jeopardy. It also held that the exclusion of certain statements as hearsay was proper and that the prosecutor's r
• United States v. Sopher
  362 F.2d 523· 7th Cir.· 1966-06-20 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the evidence supported the charges of violating the Hobbs Act and conspiracy, and that a contemporaneous tape recording of a bribe payment was not a statement producible under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3500.
• Ernest "Duke" Arnold v. United States
  336 F.2d 347· 9th Cir.· 1964-09-04 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the two conspiracies charged were factually and legally distinct, and therefore, the appellant's conviction did not violate the prohibition against double jeopardy. The court also found that any variance between the indictment and the proof was not material an
• Carlin Constantine Venus v. United States
  287 F.2d 304· 9th Cir.· 1960-12-24 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the evidence supported the jury's finding that the appellant knowingly failed to keep his local draft board advised of his address, and that his speedy trial rights were not violated.
• Berenbeim v. United States
  164 F.2d 679· 10th Cir.· 1947-11-05 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for a single conspiracy to defraud the United States, and that the jury instructions on intent were adequate.