United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit
No. 00-2097
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appellant,
v.
JOHN MORAN and NORA MORAN,
Defendants, Appellees.
ERRATA
The opinion of this court, issued on September 23, 2002,
should be amended as follows.
The last paragraph of Chief Judge Boudin's concurring opinion,
beginning on page 32 and continuing to page 33, should be replaced
with the following two paragraphs:
In the district court, Nora moved for a judgment of
acquittal based on insufficient evidence; thereafter she argued to
the district court that this filing should in the alternative be
treated as a motion for a new trial on the same ground. The
government takes the position that the alternative request was
untimely and did not constitute a proper motion for a new trial.
The district court apparently did not rule one way or the other
Page 1 of 2
because the alternative request was mooted by the directed judgment
of acquittal. On remand, the new trial request and the
government's objections remain to be considered.
The district court, already disposed to grant an
acquittal outright, may well be inclined to grant a new trial on
weight-of-the-evidence grounds, given the collapse of the
government's primary voting theory and the thin factual support for
the fraudulent non-disclosure claim against Nora. See, e.g.,
United States v. Montilla-Rivera, 115 F.3d 1060, 1067 (1st Cir.
1997). This outcome might well be justified, assuming that Nora's
arguments for the timeliness of the new trial motion can overcome
the government's asserted objections.
Page 2 of 2