United States v. Starkweather

USCA1 Opinion




February 17, 1994 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

___________________


No. 93-1999




UNITED STATES,

Appellee,

v.

HERMON RAYMOND STARKWEATHER,

Defendant, Appellant.


__________________

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

[Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge]
___________________

___________________

Before

Breyer, Chief Judge,
___________
Boudin and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
______________

___________________

Perry O'Brian, on brief for appellant.
_____________
Jay P. McCloskey, United States Attorney, Elizabeth C.
__________________ _____________
Woodcock, Assistant United States Attorney, and Margaret D.
________ ____________
McGaughey, on brief for appellee.
_________



__________________

__________________























Per Curiam. Appellant Hermon Starkweather was convicted
__________

after a one day jury trial of nine counts of fraudulently

converting United States treasury funds for his own use in

violation of 18 U.S.C. 641. He now argues that there was

insufficient evidence to support a conviction.

Since the record indicates that appellant failed to

renew his motion for acquittal at the close of the case, his

conviction can only be disturbed "to prevent 'clear and gross

injustice.'" United States v. Rodriguez-Estrada, 877 F.2d
______________ _________________

153, 156-57 (1st Cir. 1989) (quoting United States v. Jiminez
_____________ _______

Perez, 869 F.2d 9, 11 (1st Cir. 1989)). Appellant has failed
_____

to show that justice miscarried in this case.

The sole basis for appellant's contention that the

evidence was insufficient to establish that he acted with the

criminal intent required for a conviction under 18 U.S.C.

1641 is that appellant testified at trial that he lacked such

intent. However, the government presented more than

sufficient evidence from which a rational juror could have

concluded beyond a reasonable doubt that criminal intent was

present. Since the jury was entitled to assess credibility

and to accept or reject any or all of appellant's testimony,

United States v. Dockray, 943 F.2d 152, 157 (1st Cir. 1991),
_____________ _______

there was no error in the fact that the jury credited the

government's version of events rather than appellant's.

Affirmed.
________



-2-