In two recent cases, United States v. D’Amelio1 and United States v. Gonzalez,2 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit addressed issues related to the constructive amendment and sufficiency of indictments. The cases are potentially important for those considering challenges to indictments, and they leave open an important issue regarding whether harmless error analysis applies when an indictment fails to set forth all of the elements of the crime alleged in the indictment.
‘United States v. D’Amelio’
In D’Amelio, the indictment charged the defendant, Daniel D’Amelio, with attempted enticement of a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2422(b). The indictment was a single paragraph, which alleged that the defendant:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
