Task: songer_suffic

What follows is an opinion from a United States Court of Appeals. The issue is: "Did the court rule that there was insufficient evidence for conviction?" Answer the question based on the directionality of the appeals court decision. If the court discussed the issue in its opinion and answered the related question in the affirmative, answer "Yes". If the issue was discussed and the opinion answered the question negatively, answer "No". If the opinion considered the question but gave a mixed answer, supporting the respondent in part and supporting the appellant in part, answer "Mixed answer". If the opinion does not discuss the issue, or notes that a particular issue was raised by one of the litigants but the court dismissed the issue as frivolous or trivial or not worthy of discussion for some other reason, answer "Issue not discussed". If the opinion considered the question but gave a "mixed" answer, supporting the respondent in part and supporting the appellant in part (or if two issues treated separately by the court both fell within the area covered by one question and the court answered one question affirmatively and one negatively), answer "Mixed answer". If the opinion either did not consider or discuss the issue at all or if the opinion indicates that this issue was not worthy of consideration by the court of appeals even though it was discussed by the lower court or was raised in one of the briefs, answer "Issue not discussed". If the court answered the question in the affirmative, but the error articulated by the court was judged to be harmless, answer "Yes, but error was harmless". 

PER CURIAM.
Defendants appeal from their conviction on two counts of making false statements to the Small Business Administration to obtain a loan, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 645(a) (1976). They were tried before a federal District Court Judge, the jury being waived; were found guilty; and each was sentenced to two years of probation and a $2,000 fine.
On appeal appellants’ basic contention is that the evidence presented in relation to the two counts was insufficient to support the conviction. While we recognize that the case was decided on conflicting evidence, we do not consider these conflicts de novo. United States v. Luxenberg, 374 F.2d 241 (6th Cir. 1967). We do find substantial, material and competent evidence to support the findings of guilt by the District Judge.
Further, we find no error in the fact that at the conclusion of argument on defendants’ motion for judgment of acquittal, Judge Gubow proposed to both counsel that each should concurrently submit findings of fact and conclusions of law within 10 days, which suggestion was agreed upon by both counsel for defense and the government. Under these circumstances, we find no denial of or prejudice to defendants’ rights to have a closing argument made in their behalf.
The judgments of conviction are affirmed.

Question: Did the court rule that there was insufficient evidence for conviction?
A. No
B. Yes
C. Yes, but error was harmless
D. Mixed answer
E. Issue not discussed
Answer:

Answer: A