§Why CasetextPricing

USA v. DAVIS

MOTION to Dismiss Count

12 Cited authorities

  1. Blockburger v. United States

    284 U.S. 299 (1932)   Cited 9,742 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the test for whether two offenses are distinct for double jeopardy purposes is "whether each provision requires proof of a fact which the other does not"

  2. U.S. v. Bortnovsky

    820 F.2d 572 (2d Cir. 1987)   Cited 464 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the standard of review of a decision denying a bill of particulars is abuse of discretion

  3. Drew v. United States

    331 F.2d 85 (D.C. Cir. 1964)   Cited 738 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that evidence of other crimes is inadmissible to prove a defendant's disposition to commit the crime charged but may be admissible for other legitimate non-disposition purposes

  4. United States v. Addonizio

    451 F.2d 49 (3d Cir. 1971)   Cited 416 times
    Holding no abuse of discretion in denying bill of particulars concerning identification of the construction contracts involved in conspiracy because the indictment listed two of the construction jobs connected to the conspiracy

  5. U.S. v. Davidoff

    845 F.2d 1151 (2d Cir. 1988)   Cited 223 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding a bill of particulars necessary to prevent unfair surprise where the defendant did not know at trial what other companies were implicated in the allegations

  6. U.S. v. Harris

    959 F.2d 246 (D.C. Cir. 1992)   Cited 121 times
    Holding that where statute required five members of criminal enterprise, jury need not agree on which five people were members, citing Schad

  7. United States v. Reed

    639 F.2d 896 (2d Cir. 1981)   Cited 164 times
    Holding that due process was not violated where the defendant alleged only that government agents "enticed" him "under false pretenses and with the use of a revolver and threatening language"

  8. United States v. Pollack

    534 F.2d 964 (D.C. Cir. 1976)   Cited 111 times
    Holding that evidence that is both Brady and Jencks material may be withheld until after the witness has taken the stand

  9. United States v. Swaim

    757 F.2d 1530 (5th Cir. 1985)   Cited 62 times
    Concluding that counts of indictment charging violation of same statute based on "different evidence" were not multiplicitous

  10. United States v. Bradsby

    628 F.2d 901 (5th Cir. 1980)   Cited 46 times
    In United States v. Bradsby, 628 F.2d 901, 906 (5th Cir. 1980), we adopted the Sixth Circuit's position that while the failure to raise a double jeopardy claim before trial waives all challenges to the indictment itself, it does not mean that "the defendant is... forced to serve the erroneous sentence because of any waiver."