Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web
Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive
Search
Yahoo! News
Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com
Search
Google Blog
Search
Technorati Blog
Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Harold E. Staples, Defendant-appellant
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit. - 30 F.3d 108
July 21, 1994
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma (D.C. No. 90-CR-75-C).
Susan W. Pennington, Asst. U.S. Atty. (Tony M. Graham, U.S. Atty. and Neal B. Kirkpatrick, Asst. U.S. Atty., with her on the brief), Tulsa, OK, for plaintiff-appellee.
Clark O. Brewster of Brewster and Shallcross (Jennifer L. DeAngelis with him on the brief), Tulsa, OK, for defendant-appellant.
Before ANDERSON and EBEL, Circuit Judges, and ANDERSON,* District Judge.
STEPHEN H. ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.
Pursuant to the opinion of the United States Supreme Court in Staples v. United States, --- U.S. ----, 114 S.Ct. 1793, 128 L.Ed.2d 608 (1994), the court recalls its mandate and vacates its judgment. The judgment of conviction entered by the district court is also vacated.
The appellant has consistently challenged the sufficiency of the evidence in this case, including motions at trial for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the government's case and at the close of all the evidence, and argument of the point on appeal. We address those contentions anew in light of the opinion of the Supreme Court. See United States v. Cooley, 1 F.3d 985, 996-98 (10th Cir.1993); United States v. Haddock, 961 F.2d 933, 934 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. 88, 121 L.Ed.2d 50 (1992) (and cases cited therein); United States v. Jelsma, 630 F.2d 778 (10th Cir.1980); and United States v. Morris, 612 F.2d 483, 491-92 (10th Cir.1979).
Upon reviewing the record we conclude that no rational juror could find Mr. Staples guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offense charged. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED to the district court with instructions to enter a judgment of acquittal. The mandate shall issue forthwith.