Court Opinion

ID: 9463964
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 23:21:41.655213+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:38:23.394144
License: Public Domain

MEREDITH, Chief District Judge,
dissenting:
I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion of my learned colleagues. The facts in this case are not like those in the cases cited requiring an acquittal instead of a new trial because of double jeopardy. Sapir v. United States, Forman v. United States, and Diggs v. United States, supra. I have no disagreement with the holdings in those cases where insufficient evidence is presented and no motion has been made for a new trial and only a motion for a judgment of acquittal has been filed. The defendant cannot be tried again because of double jeopardy.
In the instant case there was sufficient evidence presented to the Court to warrant a conviction, but part of it was not presented to the jury and they found defendant guilty.
I consider this a trial error and would affirm the judgment of conviction entered after retrial.