USA v. Jesse Bailey
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 10a0140n.06 No. 08-6434 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JESSE RONDALE BAILEY, Defendant-Appellant.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
Mar 04, 2010
LEONARD GREEN, Clerk
CLAY and McKEAGUE, Circuit Judges; POLSTER, District Court Judge.*
Per Curiam. On August 15, 2007, a jury convicted Jesse Bailey on multiple counts of distributing and conspiring to distribute cocaine. Following his conviction, Bailey moved the district court for a Judgment of Acquittal as to Count 1 of the superceding indictment, and, in the alternative, for a New Trial. On July 1, 2007, District Judge Thomas W. Phillips issued an order and memorandum in part denying both motions. Bailey now appeals. Having duly considered the arguments and the record, we find Bailey's appeal to be meritless. Bailey's arguments were fairly and adequately addressed in Judge Phillips' July 1, 2007 memorandum. Indeed, large sections of Bailey's brief are copied verbatim from his original motion, such that Judge Phillips was presented with and was able to address in a thorough and competent fashion the same arguments Bailey now makes on appeal. Because the issuance of a full opinion Honorable Dan Aaron Polster, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.
No. 08-6495 William Davis v. City of Murfreesboro would serve no jurisprudential purpose and would be duplicative, we AFFIRM on the basis of the district court's memorandum the denial of Bailey's motions for a judgment of acquittal and for a new trial.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?