HELMICH

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (42 total)

• Carroll v. State, 497 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
  …tatement admissible as substantive evidence if it meets the requirements of Federal, Rule of Evidence 801(d)(1)(B) and is relevant under Federal Rule of Evidence 401 by being made prior to the time the alleged motive to falsify arose), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 939, 104 S.Ct. 352, 78 L.Ed.2d 317 (1983); United States v. Parry, 649 F. 2d 292 (5th Cir.1981) (prior consistent statements are admissible as substantive evidence under Rule 801(d)(1)(B) regardless of whether they are made prior to the existence of a m…
• Golden v. State, 509 So. 2d 1149 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
  …to be weak, the facts could arguably support the charge made, and it was thus within the prosecutor’s discretion to seek conviction on this charge. U.S. v. Helmich, 521 F.Supp. 1246 (M.D.Fla.1981), affirmed, 704 F. 2d 547 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 939, 104 S.Ct. 353, 78 L.Ed.2d 317 (1981); see State v. Cain, 381 So. 2d 1361 (Fla.1980) (discretion of prosecutor in deciding whether and how to prosecute is absolute). We find no error on this ground. Appellant next argues that his trial counsel was…
• United States v. Gimbel, 830 F.2d 621 (7th Cir. 1987)
  …o. 44, 82d Cong., 1st Sess. 19 (1951). Accordingly, we have consistently recognized that “cases construing the mail fraud statute are applicable to the wire fraud statute.” United States v. Feldman, 711 F. 2d 758, 763 n. 1 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 939, 104 S.Ct. 352, 78 L.Ed.2d 317 (1983). We see no basis on which we can depart from this approach. We therefore conclude that the wire fraud statute is “limited in scope to the protection of property rights,” McNally, —U.S. at -, 107 S.Ct. at 2881.…