brief case of united states v. liebo, united states court of appeals, eight circuit, 1991,923 F.2d...

brief case of united states v. liebo, united states court of appeals, eight circuit, 1991,923 F.2d 1308

Solutions

Expert Solution

In this case Richard Liebo is appealing for being convicted for violating the bribery provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. He is appealing in the United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit and his appeal is based on the premise of insufficient evidence and because of the error on the part of district court in instructing the jury. Liebo also states that there was an abuse of discretion by the district court as it denied Liebo’s motion for a new trial based on new evidence that was discovered.

The United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit held that sufficient evidence existed and this will sustain the convictions. It also held that there was no error on the part of district court in instructing the jury. It, however, reversed the district court’s denial of Liebo’s motion for a new trial. As such a new trial was remanded by the United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

ekkarill92 answered 1 year ago

Next > < Previous

Related Solutions

The United States Court of Appeals cited precedent in deciding to hear a case where United...

The United States Court of Appeals cited precedent in deciding to hear a case where United States Congress repeal (overturn of a previous statute) of the Voting Rights Acts conflicts with the 15th Amendment of the United States Constitution. Which case serves as precedent for the Supreme Court?

Brief the following case: Joseph Radtke, S.c., Plaintiff-appellant, v. United States of America, Defendant-appellee, 895 F.2d...

Brief the following case: Joseph Radtke, S.c., Plaintiff-appellant, v. United States of America, Defendant-appellee, 895 F.2d 1196 (7th Cir. 1990) https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/895/1196/46650/

BUSINESS LAW CASE ANALYSIS. Morales-Cruz v. University of Puerto Rico United States Court of Appeals, First...

BUSINESS LAW CASE ANALYSIS. Morales-Cruz v. University of Puerto Rico United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit, 676 F.3d 220 (2012). Background and Facts In 2003, Myrta Morales-Cruz began a tenure-track teaching position at the University of Puerto Rico School of Law. During Morales-Cruz’s probationary period, one of her co-teachers in a law school clinic had an affair with one of their students, and it resulted in a pregnancy. In 2008, Morales-Cruz wanted the university’s administrative committee to approve a...

Based on Court Case United States v. Bestfoods 113F.3d 572 (1998) United States v. Bestfoods 113...

Based on Court Case United States v. Bestfoods 113F.3d 572 (1998) United States v. Bestfoods 113 F.3d 572 (1998) SOUTER, JUSTICE The United States brought this action under §107(a)(2) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) against, among others, respondent CPC International, Inc., the parent corporation of the defunct Ott Chemical Co. (Ott II), for the costs of cleaning up industrial waste generated by Ott II’s chemical plant. Section 107(a)(2) authorizes suits against, among others,...

brief the court decision entitled United States v. Hamilton, 4th Ct. App. 2012

brief the court decision entitled United States v. Hamilton, __4th Ct. App. __ 2012

In 2014, the 11th United States Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Chiquita Brands, a...

In 2014, the 11th United States Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Chiquita Brands, a Cincinnati–based multinational marketer and distributor of food products—widely known for its Chiquita banana brand—which had been accused by 4000 Colombians of supporting paramilitary soldiers who had killed or tortured their relatives. The court ruled on technical grounds that the Colombians could not sue the company under the laws they had cited. “The Alien Tort Statute does not apply extraterritorially,” wrote Judge David Sentelle, and...

CASE: HAROLD DAVIS and ENID DAVIS, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee UNITED STATES COURT...

CASE: HAROLD DAVIS and ENID DAVIS, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 861 F.2d 558 November 14, 1988 Plaintiff-appellants Harold and Enid Davis claimed charitable deductions under IRC section 170 for funds they sent to their two sons for their support while they served as full-time unpaid missionaries for the Church of Jesus Christ of LatterDay-Saints at the New York City Mission and at the New Zealand/Cook Islands Mission. These...

Broadcast Music, Inc. v. McDade & Sons, Inc., 928 F.Supp.2d 1120 (2013), United States District Court...

Broadcast Music, Inc. v. McDade & Sons, Inc., 928 F.Supp.2d 1120 (2013), United States District Court for Arizona Norton’s Country Corner (Norton’s) is a cowboy bar located in Queen Creek, Arizona. The bar is owned by McDade & Sons, Inc., which is solely owned by Nancy McDade. Live bands play country-and-western music at Norton’s on various nights of the week. Certain copyright owners of music have authorized Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI), to license the use of their copyright songs to...

Must the U.S Circuit of Appeals for the First Circuit follow a trial court decision of...

Must the U.S Circuit of Appeals for the First Circuit follow a trial court decision of the same circuit concerning a federal issue? Why or why not?

United States v. Bailey United States Supreme Court 444 U.S. 394 (1980)

Subjects