Particular AllegationsPlace of Offense
Under early English law, when jurors were also witnesses
summoned from the
vicinage, the sheriff needed to know where the crime was committed
in order to
summon the proper jury. However, under current Federal law, the
information need not allege a place where the offense occurred.
indictments allege that the crime took place "in the . . . District
of . . ." but
omit any reference to such particulars as State, county, city, or
"Most authorities assume that an allegation is sufficient after
shows it (the crime) to have been done within the jurisdiction of
See Ledbetter v. United States, 170 U.S. 606, 613
Where place is an element of the offense, however, it must be
set out. For
example, in an indictment under 18 U.S.C. § 2312, interstate
of a stolen motor vehicle, the State from which the vehicle was
taken and into
which it was transported should be named, these being essential to
An allegation that the bank robbery occurred "in the State and
New Jersey" met the requirements of an indictment. See
v. Bujese, 371 F.2d 120 (3d Cir. 1967). Likewise, it was
acts of bribery occurred in "the Western District of Texas."
United States v. Sutherland, 656 F.2d 1181 (5th Cir. 1981),
denied, 455 U.S. 949 (1982). "[I]t is well established that an
is not legally insufficient for failure to include . . . an
allegation [as to the
place where the crime occurred]." See United States v.
508 F.2d 566, 570 (1st Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S.
Even when an indictment alleged that a murder took place in the
town of Popular
instead of Brackton, and the indictment was therefore dismissed by
after the jury had been impaneled, the indictment was sufficient to
defense of double jeopardy against the subsequent, corrected
See United States v. LeMay, 330 F. Supp. 628 (D.
[cited in Criminal Resource Manual 231]