Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Search for legal issues
For help near (city, ZIP code or county)
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location

US v. Farr, No. 09-6024

Article Placeholder Image
By FindLaw Staff on January 12, 2010 4:13 PM

In a tax evasion prosecution, a denial of defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment is affirmed where: 1) a prior reversal for constructive amendment of the indictment did not itself engender double jeopardy concerns and neither the district court nor the court of appeals made factual findings tantamount to acquittal; and 2) since the Double Jeopardy Clause was not a bar to retrying defendant on the exact same offense, it did not matter whether she was instead charged with a different offense that required proof of the same elements.

Read US v. Farr, No. 09-6024

Appellate Information

Filed January 11, 2010

Judges

Opinion by Judge Siler

Find a Lawyer

More Options