Opinion ID: 354319
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Sufficiency as to Hockridge

Text: 6 Only Hockridge disputes the sufficiency of the Government's proof. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Government, Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80, 62 S.Ct. 457, 86 L.Ed. 680 (1942); United States v. Falcone, 544 F.2d 607, 610 (2d Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 916, 97 S.Ct. 1329, 51 L.Ed.2d 595 (1977), we conclude that the evidence supports Hockridge's conviction on both the conspiracy and the substantive counts. 7 The Government's proof at trial focused on four areas. First, the evidence permitted the jury to find that Hockridge knew that the financial statements submitted on behalf of Petri's corporations were false. 9 Second, the jury properly could have found that Hockridge completed false or fictitious documents in connection with several of the loans. 10 Third, the Government's proof demonstrated that Hockridge knowingly violated the bank's group credits rule by approving loans in excess of his credit authority to two or more corporations controlled by the same party without approval of other lending officers. And finally, Hockridge received the substantial bribes and gratuities detailed above. 11 Clearly, the evidence was more than sufficient.