United States v. Juan Jara-Favela

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that no construc- tive amendment occurred, even though the indictment charged the defendant with using a different term than the one the government proved he used, because in context the two terms meant the same thing
• noting the possible role of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security in the fourth element of this offense
• explaining reversal warranted only when difference between indictment and jury instruction allows “defendant to be convicted of a separate crime from the one for which he was indicted” (citation omitted)
• “We ‘scrutinize any difference between an indictment and a jury instruction’ and ‘will reverse only if that difference allows the defendant to be convicted of a separate crime from the one for which he was indicted.’”
• “We ‘scrutinize any difference between an indictment and a jury instruction’ and ‘will reverse only if that difference allows the defendant to be convicted of a separate crime from the one for which he was indicted.’”
• reviewing a preserved constructive amendment claim de novo

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).