District of Columbia· 7/11/2012
United States v. Singhal
Citations
- 876 F. Supp. 2d 82
- 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96108
- 2012 WL 2851861
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- denying motion where defendants failed to “identify any portion of the Indictment that suggests that any charge to the grand jury was legally erroneous, and resorts to speculation about what the grand jury was instructed based on what is not stated in the Indictment”
- denying motion where defendants failed to “identify any portion of 21 the Indictment that suggests that any charge to the grand jury was legally erroneous, and resorts to speculation about what the grand jury was instructed based on what is not stated in the Indictment”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.