green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
5.7 score
“e see no reason why harmless error review should not apply to the failure to include an element in an indictment that otherwise provided the defendants with fair notice of the charges against them.”
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Ricco Devon Prentiss
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (quoted)
e see no reason why harmless error review should not apply to the failure to include an element in an indictment that otherwise provided the defendants with fair notice of the charges against them.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Rayford v. Sherman
See Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 832 , 23 114 S.Ct. 1970 , 128 L.Ed.2d 811 (1994); Helling v. McKinney, 509 U.S. 25, 31 , 113 S.Ct. 2475 , 24 125 L.Ed.2d 22 (1993) 25 “The circumstances, nature, and duration of a deprivation of [ ] necessities must be 26 considered in determining whether a constitutional violation has occurred.” Johnson v. Lewis, 27 217 F.3d 726, 731 (9th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1065 , 121 S.Ct. 2215 , 150 L.Ed.2d 209 28 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
Freeze v. State
See United States v. Mojica-Baez, 229 F.3d 292, 311-12 (1st Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1065 , 121 S.Ct. 2215 , 150 L.Ed.2d 209 (2001); Campbell v. Umited States, 364 F.3d 727, 737 (6th Cir.2004), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 987 , 160 L.Ed.2d 1066 (2005); United States v. Trennell, 290 F.3d 881, 890 (7th Cir.2002), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1014 , 128 S.Ct. 508 , 154 L.Ed.2d 419 ; but see State v. Hughes, 110 P.3d 192, 204-07 (Wash.2005) (holding that lack of jury finding for aggravating *605 cireumstance is structural error and can never be harmless).
discussed
Cited "see"
Tavares v. United States
(2×)
See United States v. Mojica-Baez, 229 F.3d 292, 311 (1st Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1065 , 121 S.Ct. 2215 , 150 L.Ed.2d 209 (2001); Sustache-Rivera v. United States, 221 F.3d at 17 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Oliveira
“We review the trial court’s determination that statements were coconspirator statements under the clear error standard.” United States v. Marino, 277 F.3d 11, 25 (1st Cir.2002); see also United States v. Mojica-Baez, 229 F.3d 292, 304 (1st Cir.2000), cert. denied, 532 U.S. 1065 -66, 121 S.Ct. 2215 , 150 L.Ed.2d 209 (2001).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Ricco Devon Prentiss
In other words, “the[se] omitted elements] [must be] uncontested and supported by overwhelming evidence, such that the jury verdict would have been the same absent the error.” Id. at 17 , 119 S.Ct. 1827 ; see also United States v. Mojica-Baez, 229 F.3d 292, 311 (1st Cir.2000) (concluding that an indictment’s failure to allege an element of an offense was harmless because “[t]here is no question that the petit jury would have found [the omitted element]” had it been asked to do so), cert. denied, 121 S.Ct. 2215 , 150 L.Ed.2d 209 (2001). 1 The government’s argument turns on the meani…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Chester McCoy v. United States
See also United States v. Mojica-Baez, 229 F.3d 292, 307 (1st Cir.2000) (finding that sentencing a defendant to more than ten years for an aggravated firearm offense under 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c) where the indictment failed to allege the type of firearm used was plain error, but finding no prejudice), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 121 S.Ct. 2215 , 150 L.Ed.2d 209 (2001). 6 The Tenth Circuit recently held en banc that “the failure of an indictment to allege an essential element of a crime does not deprive a district court of subject matter jurisdiction; rather, such a failure is subject to harmless…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Utility Solid Waste Activities Group
v.
Environmental Protection Agency
v.
Environmental Protection Agency
No. 00-1242.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 4, 2001.
Published
Citer courts: Tenth Circuit (1)
C. A. 5th Cir. Cer-tiorari denied.