UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
JUAN GERARDO ROJAS, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
JUAN GERARDO ROJAS, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
574 F.2d 476
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1978)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 17 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:
Prior to our decision reported at 554 F. 2d 938, there existed some confusion about the appealability by the government of an order granting a Rule 29(c) F.R.Cr.P., motion of acquittal. In addition, it has not been clear to some that a defendant can combine a motion for a new trial under Rule 33 with a motion for acquittal. To avoid prejudice to defendants whose trials are already completed, we adopt the following rules: In all cases where the verdict or finding of guilty occurs after June 1, 1978, defendant will be required to have made a timely motion in the district court for a new trial under Rule 33 to preserve that possibility should the granted motion of acquittal under Rule 29(c) be reversed on appeal. In earlier cases, such as the one now before us, the running times for a motion for a new trial will commence (Rule 33 F.R.Cr.P.) with the receipt of the mandate, or, if the mandate is formally spread, from the spreading.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
Cyril Russell v. Price, 612 F.2d 1123 (9th Cir. 1979)
-
United States v. Humphries, 636 F.2d 1172 (9th Cir. 1980)
-
Frank Music Corp. v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., 772 F.2d 505 (9th Cir. 1985)
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- United States v. Rojas, 554 F.2d 938 (9th Cir. 1977)