Opinion ID: 380089
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Denial of Quilici's Motion for Judgment of Acquittal.

Text: 40 Quilici argues that the proof at trial was insufficient to sustain a jury verdict against him, so that the trial court erred in refusing to grant his Rule 29 motion for a judgment of acquittal. As our statement of the facts shows, there was substantial evidence from which a jury could rationally conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Quilici was guilty as charged. United States v. Nelson, 9 Cir., 1969, 419 F.2d 1237, 1242, 1245. See also United States v. Rich, 9 Cir., 1978, 580 F.2d 929, 934. Quilici was in the scam with Federbush from the beginning, and stayed with it to the end, as an active participant. 41