United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Zeki A. Sabbagh, A/k/a Isaac Sabbagh, Defendant-appellant.united States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Jack Sabbagh, A/k/a Jacko, Defendant-appellant, 27 F.3d 564 (4th Cir. 1994)

Nathan Lewin, Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin, Washington, D.C., for appellants.

Robert Reeves Harding, Asst. U.S. Atty., Stephen C. Zimmermann, Asst. U.S. Atty., Baltimore, MD, for appellee.

Niki Kuckes, David S. Cohen, Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin, Washington, D.C., for appellants.

Lynne A. Battaglia, U.S. Atty., Baltimore, MD, for appellee.

D. Md.

AFFIRMED.

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Defendants Zeki and Jack Sabbagh appeal from their convictions on charges of money laundering and conspiracy to distribute heroin. Defendants' primary contention is that the district court erred when it denied their motion for a new trial; a new trial was merited, they contend, because certain post-trial statements made by a government witness were inconsistent with that witness's trial testimony, and because the government failed to disclose to them two affidavits executed by government witnesses for use by the government in a wholly separate proceeding. After studying the briefs and reviewing the record, we conclude that the district court properly denied defendants' new trial motion and we affirm its denial on the basis of its thorough and persuasive opinion.

We have also reviewed the other arguments raised by defendants in this appeal; we find that they are without merit and reject them.

AFFIRMED