UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
DERRICK CORNELIUS GAYLE, CLAUDE BERTRAM HESTER, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS

11th Cir. | 1992-07-29
No. 90-7500
Before KRAVITCH, Circuit Judge, MORGAN and JOHNSON , Senior Circuit Judges.
967 F.2d 488 Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (1992) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM: The En Banc Court for the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the indictments of defendants Gayle and Hester as sufficient under 18 U.S.C. § 912 and remanded this case to the original panel for resolution of the remaining issues not addressed in this panel’s initial opinion.

We find that the remaining issues are either moot, because both defendants have served their full terms, or do not merit further discussion. We therefore affirm the section 912 convictions and the district court’s imposition of sentences. . The remaining issues argued in the original appeal were: (1) Whether the district court erred in finding that appellants’ impersonation was for the purpose of conducting an unlawful detention? (2) Whether a prior conviction which results in the imposition of a fine, qualifies as a “prior sentence” under the United States Sentencing Guidelines? (3) Whether the district court displayed an unawareness that a downward departure was an option at sentencing? (4) Whether U.S.S.G. § 3D 1.5 was applicable to the calculation of defendant’s sentence? (5) Whether the defendant’s Fifth Amendment right against double jeopardy was violated? (6) Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the jury’s verdict of guilty as to count one of the indictment? (7) Whether defendant Gayle should have been considered a minimal participant?

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Ivory Lee Robinson v. State, 215 So. 3d 1262 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)
    …enhancement. If a pleading should require an identification of the particular injury, additional detail is commonly seen as flowing from the factual specificity requirement rather than the essential elements requirement. See United States v. Gayle, 967 F. 2d 488 (11th Cir. 1992). Here, the record on appeal confirms Count I of the Amended Information charged that defendant “did attempt to kill ... by shooting ... with a firearm ... causing bodily harm ... did use a deadly weapon ... did possess a firearm .…
  • United States v. Fern, 155 F.3d 1318 (11th Cir. 1998)
    …e because of “goading” on the government’s part. B. Sufficiency of the Indictment “A criminal conviction will not be upheld if the indictment upon which it is based does not set forth the essential elements of the offense.” United States v. Gayle, 967 F. 2d 488, 485 (11th Cir.1992) (en banc), cert. denied, 507 U.S. 967, 118 S.Ct. 1402, 122 L.Ed.2d775 (1993). This rule serves two functions. First, it puts the defendant on notice of “the nature and cause of the accusation as required by the Sixth Amendment…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw