DAVIS

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (24 total)

• United States v. Taylor, 464 F.2d 240 (2d Cir. 1972)
  …way wrote, in a quite similar case, “There could have been no surprise or prejudice. And the particulars given in the indictment are sufficient to protect against double jeopardy.” Heisler v. United States, 394 F. 2d 692, 694 (9 Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 986, 89 S.Ct. 463, 21 L.Ed.2d 448 (1968). Indeed, Taylor’s trial counsel admitted that prior to trial he was not aware of any difference between Treasury notes and Federal Reserve notes. Appellant’s citations of such [*242] cases such as Ex Parte Bain…
• Gandy v. State OF Ala., 569 F.2d 1318 (5th Cir. 1978)
  …vidence of abuse of discretion in this case. Gandy v. State, supra 269 So. 2d at 144. While mere brevity of consultation is alone insufficient to establish a Sixth Amendment violation, Daughtery v. Beto, 388 F. 2d 810 (5th Cir. 1967), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 986, 89 S.Ct. 461, 21 L.Ed.2d 447 (1968), we need not evaluate Hancock’s performance, given the result we reach. . Compare Williams v. United States, 332 F. 2d 36 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 976, 85 S.Ct. 672, 13 L.Ed.2d 566 (1964) and Majeske v…
• United States v. Mastelotto, 717 F.2d 1238 (9th Cir. 1983)
  …Under the facts of this case, we cannot find the errors harmless. See Fed.R. Crim.P. 52(a); United States v. Stewart Clinical Laboratory, Inc., 652 F. 2d 804, 809 (9th Cir.1981); Heisler v. United States, 394 F. 2d 692, 694 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 986, 89 S.Ct. 463, 21 L.Ed.2d 448 (1968). Since the jurors were not instructed that they had to agree unanimously on the existence of the same single scheme to defraud, we cannot be certain that the defendants’ substantial right to a unanimous jury ver…

  ← 1 / 2 →