Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

United States Vs. Miller

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 01, 1985

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

50 entries 1 linked 49 unlinked
Show
  1. Jenkins Vs. Mckeithen US Supreme Court · Jun 09, 1969
  2. U.S. 130 (1985) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Miller
    Search
  3. U.S. 130 (1985) United States v. Miller
    Search
  4. He was tried on an indictment that clearly set out the offense for which he was ultimately convicted. Stirone v. United
    Search
  5. can there be a showing that the variance prejudiced the fairness of respondent's trial in any other way. Cf. Kotteakos v. United
    Search
  6. States, 328 U. S. 750 (1946). See also Berger v. United
    Search
  7. States, 295 U. S. 78 , 295 U. S. 83 (1935). Cf. also United States v. Ballard
    Search
  8. that criminal charges be set out in an indictment -- would support the result of the Court of Appeals. See Russell v. United
    Search
  9. of an accused to be tried only on charges that had in fact been passed on by a grand jury. Ibid. (citing Stirone v. United
    Search
  10. States, 361 U. S. 212 (1960), and Ex parte Bain, 121 U. S. 1 (1887)). Cf. United States v. Mastelotto
    Search
  11. by the fact that the indictment alleges more crimes or other means of committing the same crime. See, e.g., Ford v. United
    Search
  12. Salinger v. United
    Search
  13. States, 272 U. S. 542 (1926). See also Berger v. United
    Search
  14. Hall v. United
    Search
  15. offense whose elements are fully set out in an indictment can independently sustain a conviction. See, e.g., Turner v. United
    Search
  16. Crain v. United
    Search
  17. Dealy v. United
    Search
  18. Ford v. United
    Search
  19. been confined to allegations that, like those in Ford, would have had no legal relevance if proved. In Salinger v. United
    Search
  20. Id. at 272 U. S. 549 . See also Berger v. United
    Search
  21. Goto v. Lane
    Search
  22. thus conflicts with the results reached by this Court in such cases as Salinger and Ford. See also Hall v. United
    Search
  23. U. S. 634 -636. III The Court of Appeals principally relied on this Court's decision in Stirone v. United
    Search
  24. U.S. at 361 U. S. 218 -219. The Court contrasted Stirone's case with cases like Ford v. United
    Search
  25. U.S. at 361 U. S. 217 (citations omitted). Accord, Russell v. United
    Search
  26. U. S. 10 . This aspect of Bain has been reaffirmed in a number of subsequent cases. See, e.g., United States v. Norris
    Search
  27. Id. at 361 U. S. 215 -216. See also Russell v. United
    Search
  28. where courts had withdrawn or ignored independent and unnecessary allegations in the indictments. See, e.g., Ford v. United
    Search
  29. jury. Ex parte Bain, 121 U. S. 1 . But here there was no alteration of the indictment, Salinger v. United
    Search
  30. court's action, in effect, add anything to it by submitting to the jury matters which it did not charge. United States v. Norris
    Search
  31. U. S. 619 , 281 U. S. 622 . In Salinger v. United
    Search
  32. or one alleged method of committing it does not constitute a forbidden amendment of the indictment. See also Goto v. Lane
    Search
  33. from the jury's consideration one count of an indictment while submitting others for its verdict, sustained in Dealy v. United
    Search
  34. to bar subsequent prosecutions, and the Court of Appeals did not rest on any such theories of prejudice. Cf. Kotteakos v. United
    Search
  35. a charge of a very broad conspiracy and proof of far narrower but technically included conspiracies). See also Berger v. United
    Search
  36. Cf. United States v. Fabrizio
    Search
  37. Smith v. United
    Search
  38. U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Miller
    Search
  39. Stirone v. United
    Search
  40. Cf. Kotteakos v. United
    Search
  41. Berger v. United
    Search
  42. of the Court of Appeals. See Russell v. United
    Search
  43. Cf. United States v. Mastelotto
    Search
  44. Turner v. United
    Search
  45. In Salinger v. United
    Search
  46. Accord, Russell v. United
    Search
  47. Russell v. United
    Search
  48. Smith v. United
    Search
  49. United States v. Ballard
    Search
  50. United States v. Norris
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial