United States v. Travis
2:24-cr-20237
| E.D. Mich. | May 29, 2025Background
- Carl Emerson Travis is charged with multiple counts of assaulting federal officers (U.S. Marshals) using his vehicle as a deadly weapon.
- The indictment alleges seven separate assaults against seven different officers on the same date.
- Travis moved to dismiss Counts 3 through 7 of the indictment.
- Travis argues that only two officers were physically contacted, questioning the sufficiency of allegations for the remaining counts.
- Travis also contends that the indictment is defective for being multiplicitous (improperly charging a single offense multiple times) and lacks sufficient factual detail (specificity).
- The Government opposed dismissal, asserting the indictment is legally valid and adequately specific.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multiplicity | Each count is for a separate officer; not multiplicitous | Charging separate counts for different officers is multiplicitous | Not multiplicitous; each count addresses a different officer |
| Specificity | Indictment language is sufficient to inform defendant | Indictment lacks specific factual detail per count | Indictment provides sufficient factual detail and tracks the statute |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Robinson, 651 F.2d 1188 (6th Cir. 1981) (discusses the concept of multiplicity in indictments)
- Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87 (1974) (sets standard for specificity required in indictments)
- United States v. Anderson, 605 F.3d 404 (6th Cir. 2010) (an indictment that tracks statutory language is sufficient)