Opinion ID: 347528
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: the amendment of the indictment

Text: 674 As the majority opinion above indicates, it would actually amend Count 2 by reference to the allegations in Count 1: 675 Here, however, some indication of what was before the grand jury with respect to the CIA and what was intended by the phrase by other means in Count 2 is provided by the language of the conspiracy charge in Count 1 and the evidence admitted without objection in support thereof. 676 (Majority opinion at ---- of 181 U.S.App.D.C., 128 of 559 F.2d). 677 As pointed out above, the breadth and importance of the allegations in Count 1 on the CIA and its failure to make even a slight reference to such charges in Count 2, when only a slight reference was needed, indicates that the Grand Jury did not intend to charge the defendants twice for a consummated conspiracy and the substantive offense of conspiracy to defraud a United States Agency. 678 Why the majority insist on failing to apply our established law which would reverse the conviction on this single count remains a mystery. If this law is applied in the future it will be impossible to live with. 679 For the foregoing reasons 26 I respectfully dissent to the limited extent indicated above.