United States v. Stacks, No. 15-1028 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseAfter defendant was convicted of wire fraud, making a false and fraudulent claim, and making false statements, the district court granted a judgment of acquittal on two counts of making false statements, and a new trial on the remaining counts. The government appealed. Defendant's charges stemmed from his application of a disaster-loan application to the SBA. The court concluded that no reasonable jury could find that defendant made a false statement by affirming no substantial adverse change in his financial condition. Therefore, the district court did not err in granting a judgment of acquittal on Count 7 for false representations to the SBA. The court also concluded that the district court did not err in granting acquittal on Count 8 where no reasonable jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant willfully and knowingly made a false statement. Finally, the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial on the remaining counts where it weighed the evidence supporting the verdicts against the exculpatory evidence before concluding in a thorough, reasoned manner that a miscarriage of justice may occur if the verdicts were allowed to stand. The district court did not abuse its considerable discretion in doing so. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Benton, Author, with Murphy and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Criminal Case - conviction. Government appeals grant of new trial and grant of motion for acquittal of two counts of making a false statement to a government agency. The district court did not err in granting acquittal of two counts, as no reasonable jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt the Stack willfully and knowingly made the false statements. The district court did not abuse its considerable discretion in granting a new trial on the wire fraud, false claim and false statement charges. The district court thoroughly weighed the evidence supporting the verdicts against the exculpatory evidence and reasoned that a miscarriage of justice may occur if the verdicts were allowed to stand.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.