BURKS

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (33 total)

• United States v. Hooshang Hooshmand, 931 F.2d 725 (11th Cir. 1991)
  …nd the indictment sufficient ‘unless it is so defective that it does not, by any reasonable construction, charge an offense for which the defendant is convicted.’ ” United States v. Chilcote, 724 F. 2d 1498, 1504-05 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, [*735] 467 U.S. 1218, 104 S.Ct. 2665, 81 L.Ed.2d 370 (1984) (quoting United States v. Trollinger, 415 F. 2d 527, 528 (5th Cir.1969) (per curiam)). Count one of the indictment alleged that Dr. Hooshmand presented to Blue Cross a fraudulent claim upon the United States b…
• United States v. Batista-Polanco, 927 F.2d 14 (1st Cir. 1991)
  …67 F. 2d at 1153. Mere speculation as to the usefulness of an informant’s testimony is insufficient to warrant disclosure. United States v. Giry, 818 F. 2d 120, 130 (1st Cir.1987); United States v. Hemmer, 729 F. 2d 10, 15 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1218, 104 S.Ct. 2666, 81 L.Ed.2d 371 (1984). When the informant is a mere “tipster,” a conduit rather than a participant in the activity, id., disclosure is required only in “exceptional cases,” United States v. Mar [*20] tinez, 922 F. 2d 914, 920-21 (1s…
• United States v. McLAIN, 823 F.2d 1457 (11th Cir. 1987)
  …against McLain. These facts fit the King criterion and lead us to the conclusion that the redacted plea agreements were admissible. Furthermore, these facts are comparable to United States v. Chilcote, 724 F. 2d 1498 (11th Cir.1984), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1218, 104 S.Ct. 2665, 81 L.Ed.2d 370 (1984), wherein a co-defendant’s plea agreement was correctly admitted by the court when it was not improperly used as substantial evidence of the defendant’s guilt by the government, and the defense counsel’s referra…