United States v. Harold E. Staples

Tenth Circuit

United States v. Harold E. Staples

30 F.3d 108, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18234, 1994 WL 378672

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

DecidedJuly 21, 1994

Docket91-5033

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 30 F.3d 108 (United States v. Harold E. Staples) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Harold E. Staples, 30 F.3d 108, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18234, 1994 WL 378672 (10th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

STEPHEN H. ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.

Pursuant to the opinion of the United States Supreme Court in Staples v. United States, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 1793, 128 L.Ed.2d 608 (1994), the court recalls its mandate and vacates its judgment. The judgment of conviction entered by the district court is also vacated.

The appellant has consistently challenged the sufficiency of the evidence in this case, including motions at trial for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the government’s case and at the close of all the evidence, and argument of the point on appeal. We address those contentions anew in light of the opinion of the Supreme Court. See United States v. Cooley, 1 F.3d 985, 996-98 (10th Cir.1993); United States v. Haddock, 961 F.2d 933, 934 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 88, 121 L.Ed.2d 50 (1992) (and cases cited therein); United States v. Jelsma, 630 F.2d 778 (10th Cir.1980); and United States v. Morris, 612 F.2d 483, 491-92 (10th Cir.1979).

Upon reviewing the record we conclude that no rational juror could find Mr. Staples guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offense charged. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the district court with instructions to enter a judgment of acquittal. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

STEPHEN H. ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.

Pursuant to the opinion of the United States Supreme Court in Staples v. United States, — U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 1793, 128 L.Ed.2d 608 (1994), the court recalls its mandate and vacates its judgment. The judgment of conviction entered by the district court is also vacated.

The appellant has consistently challenged the sufficiency of the evidence in this case, including motions at trial for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the government’s case and at the close of all the evidence, and argument of the point on appeal. We address those contentions anew in light of the opinion of the Supreme Court. See United States v. Cooley, 1 F.3d 985, 996-98 (10th Cir.1993); United States v. Haddock, 961 F.2d 933, 934 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 88, 121 L.Ed.2d 50 (1992) (and cases cited therein); United States v. Jelsma, 630 F.2d 778 (10th Cir.1980); and United States v. Morris, 612 F.2d 483, 491-92 (10th Cir.1979).

Upon reviewing the record we conclude that no rational juror could find Mr. Staples guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offense charged. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the district court with instructions to enter a judgment of acquittal. The mandate shall issue forthwith.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 F.3d 108, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18234, 1994 WL 378672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-harold-e-staples-ca10-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack