U.S. v. Vaughn

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss his indictment charging conspiracy to distribute heroin, even though defendant alleged that said indictment was insufficient because it failed to allege facts that addressed any particular drug transaction. Instant indictment was sufficient since it set forth existence of drug conspiracy, operative time of said conspiracy and statute it violated, and more stringent civil pleading standards under Bell Atlantic Corp., 556 US 662, did not apply to issues regarding sufficiency of criminal indictment. Dist. Ct. similarly did not err in denying defendant’s motion for bill of particulars, where govt. produced over 350 pages of discovery involving surveillance reports and interviews with witnesses, and where defendant failed to show that denial of bill of particulars resulted in any actual prejudice. Finally, Dist. Ct. did not err in calculating defendant’s relevant conduct that included drugs sales occurring nearly three years prior to formulation of charged conspiracy, where said sales were with individual who continued to purchase drugs from defendant without interruption during time of charged conspiracy.