Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Graham

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Decided November 4, 2009No. 08-3580, 09-2009Published

1DissentGruender, Circuit Judge

I would grant rehearing en banc because I conclude that 18 U.S.C. § 2 does not require an indictment to allege that an aider and abettor shares the status element necessary to convict the principal of the particular offense at issue. The indictment here alleges that Looking Cloud is an Indian, thereby satisfying the status requirement set out in the Indian Major Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1153. Because the indictment fails to allege that either Graham or the victim is also an Indian,1 the panel concludes that the indictment is fatally defective. Although the panel opinion on its face appears…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Standefer v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. United States v. Charles E. Lester and Edward Anthony BuccieriCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1966
  3. United States v. Bernard J. CampbellCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1970
  4. United States v. F. W. StandeferCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
  5. United States v. An Chyi Liu, A/K/A Fat Frank, and Ai-Ti-Ting, A/K/A EddieCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API