GUMERSINDO VALADEZ

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• United States v. Jernigan, 341 F.3d 1273 (11th Cir. 2003)
  …used in reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, meaning that we view the facts and draw all inferences in the light most favorable to the Government.” United States v. Descent, 292 F. 3d 703, 706 (11th Cir.2002) (citations omitted), cert. denied 537 U.S. 1132, 123 S.Ct. 913, 154 L.Ed.2d 820 (2003). In this case, Jernigan and Nelson were convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), an offense that entails three distinct elements: (1) that the defendant was a convicted felon; (2) that the defendant was in…
• United States v. Perez, 443 F.3d 772 (11th Cir. 2006)
  …ew de novo the district court’s denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal, viewing the facts and drawing all inferences in the light most favorable to the government. See United States v. Descent, 292 F. 3d 703, 706 (11th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1132, 123 S.Ct. 913, 154 L.Ed.2d 820 (2003). To affirm the denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal, filed pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 29, we need determine only that a reasonable factfinder could conclude that the evidence established the defendant’s…
• United States v. Hasner, 340 F.3d 1261 (11th Cir. 2003)
  …ffense charged that the defendant may have been convicted on a ground not alleged by the indictment.” United States v. Descent, 292 F. 3d 703, 706 (11th Cir.2002) (quoting United States v. Poarch, 878 F. 2d 1355, 1358 (11th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1132, 123 S.Ct. 913, 154 L.Ed.2d 820 (2003)). Mere surplusage, however, may be deleted from an indictment without error. United States v. Cancelliere, 69 F. 3d 1116, 1121 (11th Cir.1995), as amended on clarification (2 February 1996). “To establish a vi…