DIXON

v.

MACDOUGALL

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Zelinka, 862 F.2d 92 (6th Cir. 1988)
  …ederal Practice and Procedure § 516, at 26 (2d ed. 1982), it has been considered significant. In dicta we have repeatedly stated that “amendments are deemed prejudicial per se.” United States v. Burkhart, 682 F. 2d 589, 591 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 915, 103 S.Ct. 228, 74 L.Ed.2d 181 (1982); see also Beeler, 587 F. 2d at 342 (where although prejudice was clearly present, we noted the per se rule). Variances, on the other hand, will not result in reversal unless “substantial rights” of a defendant h…
• United States v. Lefler, 880 F.2d 233 (9th Cir. 1989)
  …] question decided in the case' in order to effect an ‘alteration of the rights adjudicated.’" Dieter, 429 U.S. at 8-9, 97 S.Ct. at 19-20 (citation omitted). .See also United States v. Janovich, 688 F. 2d 1227 (9th Cir.) (per curiam), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 915, 103 S.Ct. 228, 74 L.Ed.2d 180 (1982) (reconsideration of F.R.Crim.P. 35(b) motion). . 18 U.S.C. § 3604(a), provides: A court, after imposing a sentence of probation, may direct a United States Marshal to furnish the probationer with— (a) Transpo…