Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

US v. Farr, No. 09-6024

By FindLaw Staff on January 12, 2010 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

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


Opinion by Judge Siler

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard