finding information, amusement, sexual intercourse, the promise of sexual intercourse, a promise to reinstate an employee, and an agreement not to run in a primary election were things of value
Summary of this case from United States v. DickieNo. 79-267.
October 1, 1979.
C.A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 601 F. 2d 69.
finding information, amusement, sexual intercourse, the promise of sexual intercourse, a promise to reinstate an employee, and an agreement not to run in a primary election were things of value
Summary of this case from United States v. Dickiefinding warrant sufficient although only description of location to be searched was incorrect street address, it was unlikely wrong premises would be searched because incorrect address did not exist and agents executing warrant personally knew location to be searched
Summary of this case from Dost v. Stateupholding search of incorrectly described premises because the stated address was reasonable for the location intended and there was no likelihood of a mistaken search of the wrong premises since the agent executing the search personally knew which premises were intended to be searched
Summary of this case from State v. Gonzalesdiscussing 18 U.S.C. § 656, and stating that "it is sufficient that the defendant at least temporarily deprive[d] the [government] of the possession, control or use of its funds" and that "[s]ubsequent restitution ... is not a defense since the crime [of embezzlement or theft] is complete when the misapplication occurs"
Summary of this case from United States v. BakerFull title:GIRARD ET AL. v. UNITED STATES
Court:U.S.
Date published: Oct 1, 1979
The vagueness doctrine thus helps ensure due process of law and in particular acts to dissuade arbitrary or…
United States v. PrevitiThe Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure have liberalized the requirements of a criminal indictment. Under…