Home » Our Passion » Legal Resources » Indictments
Indictments: Table of Contents
See Full Document
Part III: Indictments
- JOINDER/SEVERANCE……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1
- DISTINCTION BETWEEN “MISJOINDER” UNDER RULE 8 AND “PREJUDICIAL” JOINDER UNDER RULE 14:………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2
- JOINDER OF OFFENSE……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 2
- SIMILAR OFFENSE (WITHIN SHORT PERIOD OF TIME)……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 2
- MISJOINDER……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3
- IMPROPERLY CHARGED OFFENSES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3
- “MULTIPLICITOUS” INDICTMENT……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3
- “DUPLICITOUS” INDICTMENT……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
- REMEDY FOR “MULTIPLICITOUS” OR “DUPLICITOUS” PLEADING [ELECTION OF “OFFENSES” OR “COUNTS”]………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 4
- REMEDY FOR “MISJOINDER” OF OFFENSES [Rule 8a] [SEVERANCE FOR SEPARATE TRIAL]………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
- REMEDY FROM “PREJUDICIAL” JOINDER [Rule 14] [SEVERANCE FOR SEPARATE TRIAL]………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
- JOINING UNRELATED CRIMES “OF THE SAME OR SIMILAR CHARACTER” CREATES DANGER OF PREJUDICE”………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 6
- MISJOINDER UNDER RULE 8(a) IS INHERENTLY PREJUDICIAL……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7
- SUCH JOINDER IS NEITHER EFFICIENT NOR ECONOMICAL……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7
- STANDARD OF REVIEW UNDER RULE 8(a)……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8
- JOINDER OF DEFENDANTS [Rule 8b]……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8
- DISTINCTION BETWEEN RULES 8(a) AND 8(b)……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
- OFFENSES OF “SAME OF SIMILAR CHARACTER”……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
- PROPRIETY OF JOINDER VIEWED FROM FACE OF INDICTMENT……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 9
- RULE 8(b) GOVERNS SEVERANCE OF DEFENDANTS OR OFFENSES IN MULTIPLE DEFENDANT CASES………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10
- CONSPIRACY………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 10
- DOUBLE JEOPARDY BARS MULTIPLE PROSECUTIONS FOR THE SAME OFFENSE:. 11
- TEST AS TO WHAT CONSTITUTES “SAME SERIES OF ACTS OR TRANSACTIONS”: . 12
- COMMON DEFENDANTS ALONE INSUFFICIENT………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 12
- SAME TIME PERIOD OR STATUTORY VIOLATION ALONE INSUFFICIENT………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 12
- OVERALL SCHEME INVOLVING ALL DEFENDANTS………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13
- MISJOINDER WHERE DIFFERENT FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES MUST BE ESTABLISHED TO SUPPORT THE DIFFERENT ALLEGATIONS………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 13
- “WHEELS” AND “CHAINS”:………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 14
- RULE 14: RELIEF FROM PREJUDICIAL JOINDER………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 14
- “PREJUDICE” FOUND:………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 15
- MULTI-COUNT INDICTMENT IN WHICH DEFENDANT IS ONLY MINIMALLY CHARGED………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 16
- ANTAGONISTIC DEFENSES………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 16
- TEST:………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 17
- PURPOSE OF RULE………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 17
- PREJUDICE THAT WARRANTS SEVERANCE………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 18
- CO-DEFENDANT’S DEFENSE PREJUDICIAL TO DEFENDANT………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 18
- CO-DEFENDANT HAS PLEAD GUILTY TO SIMILAR OFFENSE………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 18
- ATTORNEY’S CONFLICT………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 18
- JOINT TRIAL WOULD BE SUBVERT PRIVILEGE………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 18
- SPILL-OVER EFFECT………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 19
- TEST:………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 19
- QUALITATIVE DISPARITY MUST BE SHOWN:………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 19
- REPUTATION AND PAST CRIME ALONE ARE INSUFFICIENT………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20
- CO-DEFENDANT IS AN ASSHOLE………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20
- CO-DEFENDANT IS BULL-SHIT DEFENSE………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20
- DELETERIOUS EFFECTS OF PROLONGED COMPLEX CASES………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20
- THE “65 DAY RULE” IN MEGA-TRIALS………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 21
- “BRUTON” SEVERANCE………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 21
- BRUTON DISCOVERY RIGHT UNDER RULE 14:………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 23
- CONTEXTUAL INCULPATION………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 23
- FILLING IN THE BLANKS:………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 25
- “DELUNA” SEVERANCE………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 25
- NEED TO CALL A JOINED CO-DEFENDANT TO TESTIFY ON DEFENDANT’S BEHALF………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 27
- TEST:………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 27
- IMMUNITY FOR DEFENSE WITNESSES………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 28
- SEVERANCE OF OFFENSES:………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 29
- FIFTH AMENDMENT………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 29
- EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE ONLY AS TO ONE COUNT:………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 30
- EMPANELING TWO JURIES………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 30
- FAILURE TO RENEW MOTION AT CLOSE OF EVIDENCE………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 30
- MOTIONS TO DISMISS THE INDICTMENT………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 30
- LIMITATIONS………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 30
- PRE-INDICTMENT DELAY………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 31
- PREJUDICE OF GRAND JURY………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 32
- FAILURE TO STATE AN OFFENSE………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 33
- VAGUENESS………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 34
- OUTRAGEOUS GOVERNMENT CONDUCT………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 35
- INTERFERENCE WITH RIGHT TO COUNSEL………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 36
- ETHICAL STANDARDS INCORPORATED INTO LOCAL FEDERAL COURT 37 DISMISSAL IS THE APPROPRIATE REMEDY WHERE PROSECUTOR’S INTERFERENCE WITH CITIZEN’S RIGHT TO REPRESENTATION CAUSES THE ACCUSED TO LOSE HIS LAWYER………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 39
- PRE-INDICTMENT AS WELL AS POST-INDICTMENT………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 40
- CHANGE OF VENUE………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 44
- CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 44
- PLACE OF TRIAL WITHIN DISTRICT………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 44
- COURT MUST GIVE DUE REGARD TO THE CONVENIENCE OF DEFENDANT AND WITNESSES………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 46
- VENUE WHERE OFFENSES CHARGED WERE COMMITTED IN MORE THAN ONE DISTRICT………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 47
- VENUE WHERE OFFENSE CHARGED IS ONE OF OMISSION:………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 48
- VENUE IN CONSPIRACY CASES……………………………………………………… 49
- VENUE WHERE OFFENSE CHARGED IS AIDING AND ABETTING:… 49
- TWO DEFENDANTS, TWO JURIES…………………………………………………… 49
- TRANSFER FROM DISTRICT FOR TRIAL…………………………………………. 50
- RULE 21, R.CR.P…………………………………………………………………………….. 50
- RULE 21(a), TRANSFER DUE TO PREJUDICE…………………………………… 50
- RULE 21(b), TRANSFER ON THE GROUNDS OF “CONVENIENCE”….. 51
- TRANSFER WITHIN A DISTRICT……………………………………………………… 52
- RULE 18, R.CR.P…………………………………………………………………………….. 52
- TRANSFER FROM DISTRICT FOR PLEA AND SENTENCE:……………… 53
- TRANSFER FOR PLEA………………………………………………………………………. 53