United States v. Kimmel

33 Citing cases

  1. U.S. v. Graham

    858 F.2d 986 (5th Cir. 1988)   Cited 24 times

    Moreover, we have considered and approved an instruction remarkably similar to that given in Graham's trial. See United States v. Kimmel, 777 F.2d 290 (5th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1104, 106 S.Ct. 1947, 90 L.Ed.2d 357 (1986). We considered Franklin and held that although "the Supreme Court and we have struggled often with inferred intent instructions, that given here is clearly acceptable and we are duty bound to follow the law approving its use."

  2. United States v. Hunt

    794 F.2d 1095 (5th Cir. 1986)   Cited 68 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that failure to instruct on good faith is not fatal when jury is given detailed instruction on specific intent and defendant has opportunity to argue good faith to jury

    In considering his arguments, we must test the instructions given not against those he requested — for a criminal defendant lacks the right to have his requests adopted word for word — but against the law. United States v. Kimmel, 777 F.2d 290, 292-93 (5th Cir. 1985), cert. denied ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 1947, 90 L.Ed.2d 357 (1986). We continue to recognize the trial judge's "substantial latitude in tailoring his instructions as long as they fairly and adequately cover the issues presented in the case."

  3. United States v. Eghobor

    812 F.3d 352 (5th Cir. 2015)   Cited 55 times
    Finding sufficient evidence of a healthcare-fraud conspiracy where the defendant "admitted patients ... by falsifying OASIS forms," "create[d] [Form 485s] prescribing [those patients] home health care," and had the forms signed by a doctor who had never treated those patients

    The judge, for instance, instructed the jurors that they “may be as leisurely in [their] deliberations as the occasion may require” and that “no juror is expected to yield a conscientious opinion he or she may have as to the weight or effect of the evidence.” See United States v. Kimmel, 777 F.2d 290, 295 (5th Cir.1985) (upholding Allen charge where “the judge tempered his remarks with reminders that each juror should remain true to his own conscience”). Under the second prong of our Allen charge analysis, this Court evaluates “the ‘totality of the circumstances' surrounding the use of the charge in assessing its coercive effect.”

  4. U.S. v. Hudson

    982 F.2d 160 (5th Cir. 1993)   Cited 18 times
    Holding defendant's enthusiasm for crime can satisfy predisposition requirement

    A trial judge has "substantial latitude in tailoring his instructions as long as they fairly and adequately cover the issues presented by the case." United States v. Kimmel, 777 F.2d 290, 293 (5th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1104, 106 S.Ct. 1947, 90 L.Ed.2d 357 (1986) (quoting United States v. Pool, 660 F.2d 547, 548 (5th Cir. 1981)). A trial judge's refusal to deliver a requested instruction is reversible error only if three conditions exist:

  5. U.S. v. Winn

    948 F.2d 145 (5th Cir. 1991)   Cited 68 times
    Holding that improper use of a summary chart was harmless because the evidence was "merely cumulative" and there was "overwhelming evidence" of the charged crime

    Taking the charge as a whole, which in all other respects is correct and adequate, there is little, if any, likelihood such parting words resulted in a "grave miscarriage of justice" or affected the fairness of the proceedings. United States v. Kimmel, 777 F.2d 290, 294 (5th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1104, 106 S.Ct. 1947, 90 L.Ed.2d 357 (1986). In Kimmel, 777 F.2d at 294 n. 3, the instructions of the trial court included the very language at issue in this case.

  6. Lowenfield v. Phelps

    817 F.2d 285 (5th Cir. 1987)   Cited 101 times
    Holding that overwhelming evidence of competency to stand trial rendered harmless any potential error the court made in placing the burden of proof on the defendant to show incompetency rather than on the government to show competency

    Bottom, 638 F.2d at 787; see also United States v. Cheramie, 520 F.2d 325, 328 (5th Cir. 1975).United States v. Kimmel, 777 F.2d 290, 294 (5th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 1947, 90 L.Ed.2d 357 (1986).United States v. Fossler, 597 F.2d 478, 484-85 (5th Cir. 1979).

  7. United States v. Shah

    95 F.4th 328 (5th Cir. 2024)   Cited 8 times
    In Shah, we decided that "committed by fraud or deceit" refers to the way in which some offenses "against property" are committed and concluded that "the district court may look to the facts and circumstances of the offense of conviction to determine if the MVRA authorizes a restitution order."

    Tompkins v. Cyr, 202 F.3d 770, 784 (5th Cir. 2000); see also United States v. Daniels, 247 F.3d 598, 601 (5th Cir. 2001).United States v. Hunt, 794 F.2d 1095, 1097 (5th Cir. 1986) (quoting United States v. Kimmel, 777 F.2d 290, 293 (5th Cir. 1985)). court abuses its discretion only if "(1) the requested instruction is substantively correct; (2) the requested instruction is not substantially covered in the charge given to the jury; and (3) it concerns an important point in the trial so that the failure to give it seriously impairs the defendant's ability to effectively present a particular defense."

  8. United States v. Shah

    84 F.4th 190 (5th Cir. 2023)   Cited 7 times

    Tompkins v. Cyr, 202 F.3d 770, 784 (5th Cir. 2000); see also United States v. Daniels, 247 F.3d 598, 601 (5th Cir. 2001).United States v. Hunt, 794 F.2d 1095, 1097 (5th Cir. 1986) (quoting United States v. Kimmel, 777 F.2d 290, 293 (5th Cir. 1985)).United States v. St. Gelais, 952 F.2d 90, 93 (5th Cir. 1992) (citing Hunt, 794 F.2d at 1097).

  9. U.S. v. Winters

    105 F.3d 200 (5th Cir. 1997)   Cited 33 times
    Holding that defendant's sarcidosis, a chronic inflammation of multiple organs, was not an exceptional medical condition requiring a downward departure

    Winters complains that the district court coerced the jury into finding him guilty by stating that "[i]f you should fail to agree on a verdict as to the remaining counts the case is left open and must be tried again." Winters asserts this claim despite acknowledging that the modified Allen charge given by the court in this case has been explicitly approved by the Fifth Circuit. U.S. v. Kimmel, 777 F.2d 290, 294-295 n. 4 (5th Cir. 1985). Winters further argues that the Allen charge was improper because it was given after the jury had deliberated seven and one half hours and had reached a guilty verdict with respect to defendant Johns.

  10. U.S. v. Cavin

    39 F.3d 1299 (5th Cir. 1994)   Cited 61 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the McCarran Act did not strip federal court of jurisdiction over a criminal prosecution for mail fraud by operators of an insurance business even though Louisiana state insurance regulators also sought criminal convictions for the same conduct

    The implication of the charge as given was that the jury could convict without finding fraudulent intent. United States v. Kimmel, 777 F.2d 290, 293 (5th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1104, 106 S.Ct. 1947, 90 L.Ed.2d 357 (1986). b. Deliberate ignorance.