United States v. Carll

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that an indictment is generally sufficient when the statutory terms “fully, directly, and expressly, without any uncertainty or ambiguity, set forth all the elements necessary to constitute the offence intended to be punished”
• “The validity of alleging the elements of an offense in the language of the statute is, of course, well established.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).