EMBREY

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Polite v. State, 933 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
  …re a particular element of knowledge as an element of the crime. The two concepts, however, seem quite interchangeable and indistinguishable for purposes of analysis and result. See United States v. Kimes, 246 F. 3d 800 (6th Cir.2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1085, 122 S.Ct. 823, 151 L.Ed.2d 705 (2002); United States v. Berki, 936 F. 2d 529, 532 (11th Cir.l991)("[W]e conclude that [threatening to assault or murder a federal judge] is not a specific intent crime. In other words, it was not essential for [the d…
• Hardwick v. Crosby, 320 F.3d 1127 (11th Cir. 2003)
  …f the murder. Thus, this case is distinguished from other death-penalty cases where the petitioner's use of drugs and/or alcohol at the time of the murder was either exaggerated, Brown v. Jones, 255 F. 3d 1273, 1278-79 (11th Cir.2001), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1085, 122 S.Ct. 823, 151 L.Ed.2d 705 (2002), or not credible, Duren v. Hopper, 161 F. 3d 655, 661-62 (11th Cir.1998). . 3.850 Proceeding at 309. After interviewing Hardwick in 1985, Dr. Barnard determined that Hardwick was competent to stand trial and t…
• United States v. Ettinger, 344 F.3d 1149 (11th Cir. 2003)
  …ute requires only an intent to assault and not a specific intent to assault a federal officer). Further, other circuits have found that 18 U.S.C. § 111 is a general intent crime. United States v. Kimes, 246 F. 3d 800, 809 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 1085, 122 S.Ct. 823, 151 L.Ed.2d 705 (2002). (§ 111 is a general intent crime and the defense of diminished capacity does not apply). See also, United States v. Ricketts, 146 F. 3d 492, 496 (7th Cir.1998); United States v. Kleinbart, 27 F. 3d 586, 592 (…