Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesse Rondale BAILEY, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2010-03-04
Citations: 367 F. App'x 647
Docket Number: No. 08-6434
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesse Rondale BAILEY, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: BEFORE: CLAY and MCKEAGUE, Circuit Judges; POLSTER, District Court Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 367
Pages: 647–648

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jesse Rondale BAILEY, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 08-6434.
United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
March 4, 2010.
BEFORE: CLAY and MCKEAGUE, Circuit Judges; POLSTER, District Court Judge.
Honorable Dan Aaron Polster, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
On August 15, 2007, 2007 WL 2274299, a jury convicted Jesse Bailey on multiple counts of distributing and conspiring to distribute cocaine. Following his conviction, Bailey moved the district court for a Judgment of Acquittal as to Count 1 of the superceding indictment, and, in the alternative, for a New Trial. On July 1, 2007, District Judge Thomas W. Phillips issued an order and memorandum in part denying both motions. Bailey now appeals.
Having duly considered the arguments and the record, we find Bailey's appeal to be meritless. Bailey's arguments were fairly and adequately addressed in Judge Phillips' July 1, 2007 memorandum. Indeed, large sections of Bailey's brief are copied verbatim from his original motion, such that Judge Phillips was presented with — and was able to address in a thorough and competent fashion — the same arguments Bailey now makes on appeal. Because the issuance of a full opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose and would be duplicative, we AFFIRM on the basis of the district court's memorandum the denial of Bailey's motions for a judgment of acquittal and for a new trial.