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

• Babson v. United States
  330 F.2d 662· 9th Cir.· 1964-04-08 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury's verdicts for mail fraud and conspiracy, and that procedural errors in jury instructions were not prejudicial.
• United States v. Kelly
  892 F.2d 255· 3d Cir.· 1989-12-19 ·cited 26×
  The court held that admitting videotaped depositions of unavailable foreign witnesses, taken with defense counsel present and a phone line for consultation, did not violate the Confrontation Clause. The court also held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction de
• United States v. DeVARONA
  872 F.2d 114· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-18 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence supported a single conspiracy conviction and that the joinder of defendants and charges was proper, affirming the conviction.
• United States v. Bonallo
  858 F.2d 1427· 9th Cir.· 1988-10-07 ·cited 26×
  A scheme to defraud a bank under 18 U.S.C. § 1344 does not require the misrepresentation to precede the transfer of money or property; the indictment was sufficient, and the evidence supported conviction on 11 of 12 counts.
• United States v. Manotas-Mejia
  824 F.2d 360· 5th Cir.· 1987-08-04 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed convictions for distributing and importing cocaine and conspiracy, but remanded for a new sentencing hearing for one defendant due to procedural errors.
• United States v. Bruno
  809 F.2d 1097· 5th Cir.· 1987-01-29 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a scheme to bribe public officials can constitute a scheme to defraud for wire fraud purposes, and that a variance between the indictment and proof of fraud was not prejudicial where evidence supported conspiracy to bribe.
• United States v. Rinke
  778 F.2d 581· 10th Cir.· 1985-12-02 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy and Travel Act violations, but remanded one count for further findings on the 'business enterprise' element. The court also held that the use of notes to refresh memory was permissible and that evidence obtained after illegal surveill
• United States v. Gleason
  766 F.2d 1239· 8th Cir.· 1985-07-03 ·cited 26×
  The court held that evidence of conspiracy cover-up was admissible, the trial judge's conduct was not improper, the Speedy Trial Act was not violated, cross-examination was permissible, and the evidence was sufficient for conviction.
• United States v. Gerrold E. Stevens
  612 F.2d 1226· 10th Cir.· 1979-11-15 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the co-conspirator's testimony was admissible, the indictment sufficiently stated public offenses, a travel act violation was proven, and the conspiracy and travel act counts were distinct offenses.
• United States v. Patton
  594 F.2d 444· 5th Cir.· 1979-05-03 ·cited 26×
  The court held that any variance between the indictment and proof was not prejudicial, hearsay statements were properly admitted as co-conspirator statements, and mid-trial rearraignment did not prejudice the appellant.
• United States v. SIR KUE Chin
  534 F.2d 1032· 2d Cir.· 1976-04-21 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a variance between the indictment charging one conspiracy and evidence showing two does not require reversal if it does not affect substantial rights, and that striking an overt act from the indictment is not an impermissible amendment.
• United States v. Cosby
  529 F.2d 143· 8th Cir.· 1976-02-09 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a variance between an indictment charging joint distribution and proof showing distribution through an intermediary is not fatal if it does not affect the defendant's substantial rights. The court also held that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in
• United States v. Grady Quicksey
  525 F.2d 337· 4th Cir.· 1975-07-25 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed convictions for conspiracy to violate the Travel Act for some defendants, vacated others, and remanded for resentencing or new trial based on the specific facts and jury findings.
• United States v. Santana
  503 F.2d 710· 2d Cir.· 1974-08-19 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to convict the appellants of participation in a narcotics conspiracy, and that their claims of error regarding evidence admissibility and jury instructions were without merit.
• United States v. Fallen
  498 F.2d 172· 8th Cir.· 1974-06-10 ·cited 26×
• United States v. Williams
  446 F.2d 486· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-17 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the statutes under which appellant was convicted are constitutional, the search and seizure were lawful, the sentence was not cruel and unusual, and the jury selection was proper.
• United States v. Chas. Pfizer & Co., Inc.
  426 F.2d 32· 2d Cir.· 1970-04-16 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of conspiracy to restrain and monopolize trade, and that the trial court's instructions and evidentiary rulings were proper.
• United States v. Weldon
  384 F.2d 772· 2d Cir.· 1967-10-30 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant forfeited his right to challenge the admission of evidence by failing to file a motion for suppression under Rule 41(e) and that other contentions lacked merit.
• Hall v. United States
  372 F.2d 603· 8th Cir.· 1967-02-08 ·cited 26×
  The court held that using a fictitious name with intent to defraud on a check transported in interstate commerce constitutes a "falsely made" or "forged" security under 18 U.S.C. § 2314, even if the financial institution did not explicitly rely on the fictitious persona.
• United States v. Rabinowitz
  176 F.2d 732· 2d Cir.· 1949-07-28 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the search conducted was unlawful because it lacked a warrant.
• Brooks v. United States
  164 F.2d 142· 5th Cir.· 1947-11-07 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a variance between an indictment charging a single conspiracy and proof showing multiple separate conspiracies is reversible error if prejudicial.
• United States v. Wodiska
  147 F.2d 38· 2d Cir.· 1945-01-29 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient for the jury to find that the appellant knowingly and fraudulently concealed cash from the bankruptcy trustee.
• United States v. POU
  953 F.2d 363· 8th Cir.· 1992-01-06 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the district court did not err in its handling of Brady material disclosures, its denial of severance motions, its finding of a single conspiracy, its sentencing determinations, or its assessment of costs against indigent defendants.
• United States v. Dolan
  544 F.2d 1219· 4th Cir.· 1976-11-11 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict that the substances involved were controlled substances and that the supplemental jury instructions were proper.
• Nelson v. State
  157 So. 2d 96· Fla. 3d DCA· 1963-10-22 ·cited 25×
  A conviction for assault with intent to commit robbery stands where the defendant attempted to force entry into a locked office by pushing past an employee, even though the employee's back was turned and the weapon was not displayed, because an assault may be committed on an unaw
• Current v. United States
  287 F.2d 268· 9th Cir.· 1961-02-23 ·cited 25×
  The court held that the indictment sufficiently alleged the essential elements of the offenses and that the admission of evidence regarding the value of marijuana was proper to establish intent to defraud.
• Booker v. State
  93 Fla. 211· Fla.· 1927-02-09 ·cited 25×
  The court reviewed the summary denial of a petition for relief filed under Criminal Procedure Rule One, which alleged denial of counsel's preparation time and an involuntary confession.
• Burt Freeman v. State
  50 Fla. 38· Fla.· 1905-06-01 ·cited 25×
  Burt Freeman was indicted for assault with intent to commit murder after shooting E. H. Campbell. A jury convicted him of aggravated assault instead, and he was sentenced to a $100 fine and one year hard labor. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting Freeman'
• United States v. Greer
  939 F.2d 1076· 5th Cir.· 1991-08-13 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the defendants were not denied a fair and impartial jury, that the evidence supported convictions for two distinct conspiracies, and that the jury instructions were adequate.
• United States v. Zelinka
  862 F.2d 92· 6th Cir.· 1988-11-25 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the admission of evidence of post-conspiracy cocaine possession was an abuse of discretion under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) because it was not probative of any material issue other than character and thus was inadmissible 'other crimes' evidence.
• United States v. Leibowitz
  857 F.2d 373· 7th Cir.· 1988-09-07 ·cited 24×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the variance between the indictment date and the proof date was not material, newly-discovered evidence was merely impeaching, and the government's reference to a witness's guilty plea was not prejudicial.
• United States v. Nechy
  827 F.2d 1161· 7th Cir.· 1987-08-27 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the administrative search was lawful, even if motivated by criminal investigation, and that the variance between the indictment and proof was harmless error.
• United States v. Piccolo
  723 F.2d 1234· 6th Cir.· 1983-12-16 ·cited 24×
  The indictment was insufficient because it lacked the specificity required to link the grand jury's concerns to the evidence presented at trial.
• United States v. Heimann
  705 F.2d 662· 2d Cir.· 1983-04-14 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court erred in finding a prejudicial variance between the indictment and the proof at trial, and that the government's evidence substantially conformed to the charges.
• United States v. Currier
  621 F.2d 7· 1st Cir.· 1980-03-25 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the federal firearms regulations applied to sales from a dealer's personal collection and that ignorance of the law is not a defense to charges of failing to maintain transaction records.
• United States v. Clay Davis and Charles Edward Fralix
  461 F.2d 83· 5th Cir.· 1972-06-02 ·cited 24×
  The court held that misdelivered mail remains within the custody of the Postal Service under 18 U.S.C.A. § 1708, but reversed a conspiracy conviction for lack of proof that the mail was stolen from an authorized depository.
• United States v. Tarrant
  460 F.2d 701· 5th Cir.· 1972-05-15 ·cited 24×·via Variance From Indictment
  The court held that the informant's entry into the defendant's home, even by pretext, did not violate the Fourth Amendment when the defendant invited the informant in, and that simultaneous possession of multiple unregistered firearms constitutes multiple offenses under 26 U.S.C.
• United States v. Verland L. Beard
  436 F.2d 1084· 5th Cir.· 1971-01-04 ·cited 24×
  A conviction must be reversed when the government effectively amends the indictment during trial to charge a different statutory offense than that presented to the Grand Jury, violating the defendant's Fifth Amendment rights.
• United States v. Lewis
  406 F.2d 486· 7th Cir.· 1969-01-29 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the convictions of Lewis and Sohn for conspiracy and substantive offenses were supported by sufficient evidence and that certain evidentiary rulings and limitations on testimony did not constitute reversible error. Lewis's convictions on two counts were dismis
• Korholz v. United States
  269 F.2d 897· 10th Cir.· 1959-08-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the indictment was not duplicitous, the evidence was sufficient to establish the elements of the statutory offense, and the trial court did not err in its rulings on evidence or jury instructions.
• United States v. Ansani
  240 F.2d 216· 7th Cir.· 1957-01-15 ·cited 24×·via Variance From Indictment
  The court held that 'trade boosters' are essential parts of gambling devices under the Johnson Act and that the registration requirements of the Act do not violate the Fifth Amendment. The court also affirmed the trial court's rulings on procedural matters.
• Glover v. State
  22 Fla. 493· Fla.· 1886-06-01 ·cited 24×
  James Glover was convicted of larceny of a gold watch in Hillsborough Circuit Court. On writ of error, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, rejecting arguments that the verdict was contrary to law, evidence, and the court's charge, and upholding the trial court's in
• United States v. Massey
  827 F.2d 995· 5th Cir.· 1987-09-03 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the government failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the mails were actually used in furtherance of the scheme, requiring reversal of mail fraud convictions. However, the court affirmed conspiracy convictions, finding it was reasonably foreseeable tha
• United States v. Soudan
  812 F.2d 920· 5th Cir.· 1986-12-15 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the appellant was not denied effective assistance of counsel, as there was no actual conflict of interest, and that the government's theory of prosecution did not constructively amend the indictment.
• United States v. Bush
  599 F.2d 72· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-18 ·cited 23×
  The court affirmed the convictions, holding that there was no fatal variance between the indictment and the proof, and that the trial judge did not err in refusing certain jury instructions.
• United States v. Warden
  545 F.2d 32· 7th Cir.· 1976-11-23 ·cited 23×
  The court held that there was no fatal variance between the indictment and proof, the quashing of the subpoena duces tecum was not an abuse of discretion, the jury instruction on materiality was proper, and the non-disclosure of witness statements did not violate Brady v. Marylan
• United States v. Willis
  940 F.2d 1136· 8th Cir.· 1991-07-23 ·cited 22×
  The court held that joinder of defendants was proper and the district court did not err in enhancing the offense level for obstruction of justice or denying a reduction for acceptance of responsibility.
• United States v. Feinman
  930 F.2d 495· 6th Cir.· 1991-04-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in departing upward from the defendant's criminal history category based on factors already accounted for in the Sentencing Guidelines.
• United States v. Guerra-Marez
  928 F.2d 665· 5th Cir.· 1991-04-01 ·cited 22×
  The court held that wiretap evidence was admissible, a variance between the indictment and evidence did not prejudice substantial rights, and prosecutorial explanations for jury strikes were adequate. However, the evidence was insufficient to support Wenseslada Reyes-Moya's consp
• United States v. Weissman
  899 F.2d 1111· 11th Cir.· 1990-04-30 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial judge's supplemental jury instruction constructively amended the indictment by allowing the jury to convict appellants on the basis of an enterprise different from the one specified in the indictment.