{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "3",
    "document_number": "621",
    "date": "02/25/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 621 Filed 02/25/22 Page 3 of 51\n\nPRELIMINARY STATEMENT\nThe Government respectfully submits this memorandum in opposition to the defendant's four post-trial motions, dated February 11, 2022 (“Def. Mot.”) (Dkt. No. 599).\n\nLEGAL STANDARD\nUnder Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a court “must enter a judgment of acquittal of any offense for which the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 29(a). “In reviewing a Rule 29 motion, the court ‘must view the evidence in a light that is most favorable to the government, and with all reasonable inferences resolved in favor of the government.’” United States v. Joseph, No. 20 Cr. 603 (PKC), 2022 WL 336975, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 2022) (quoting United States v. Anderson, 747 F.3d 51, 60 (2d Cir. 2014)). The court “must ‘defer to the jury's evaluation of the credibility of witnesses, its choices between permissible inferences, and its assessment of the weight of the evidence.’” Id. (quoting United States v. Jones, 482 F.3d 60, 68 (2d Cir. 2006)). A conviction must be upheld “if any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Peters, 843 F. App'x at 372; see also United States v. Cuti, 720 F.3d 453, 461 (2d Cir. 2013) (“A judgment of acquittal can be entered only if the evidence that the defendant committed the crime alleged is nonexistent or so meager that no reasonable jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”).\nRule 33 provides, in relevant part, that “[u]pon the defendant's motion, the court may vacate any judgment and grant a new trial if the interest of justice so requires.” Fed. R. Crim. P.\n\n2\n\nDOJ-OGR-00009565",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 621 Filed 02/25/22 Page 3 of 51",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "PRELIMINARY STATEMENT\nThe Government respectfully submits this memorandum in opposition to the defendant's four post-trial motions, dated February 11, 2022 (“Def. Mot.”) (Dkt. No. 599).",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LEGAL STANDARD\nUnder Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a court “must enter a judgment of acquittal of any offense for which the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 29(a). “In reviewing a Rule 29 motion, the court ‘must view the evidence in a light that is most favorable to the government, and with all reasonable inferences resolved in favor of the government.’” United States v. Joseph, No. 20 Cr. 603 (PKC), 2022 WL 336975, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 4, 2022) (quoting United States v. Anderson, 747 F.3d 51, 60 (2d Cir. 2014)). The court “must ‘defer to the jury's evaluation of the credibility of witnesses, its choices between permissible inferences, and its assessment of the weight of the evidence.’” Id. (quoting United States v. Jones, 482 F.3d 60, 68 (2d Cir. 2006)). A conviction must be upheld “if any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Peters, 843 F. App'x at 372; see also United States v. Cuti, 720 F.3d 453, 461 (2d Cir. 2013) (“A judgment of acquittal can be entered only if the evidence that the defendant committed the crime alleged is nonexistent or so meager that no reasonable jury could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”).",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Rule 33 provides, in relevant part, that “[u]pon the defendant's motion, the court may vacate any judgment and grant a new trial if the interest of justice so requires.” Fed. R. Crim. P.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "2",
      "position": "bottom"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00009565",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [],
    "organizations": [
      "Government",
      "Court"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "S.D.N.Y."
    ],
    "dates": [
      "February 11, 2022",
      "February 4, 2022",
      "02/25/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 621",
      "Dkt. No. 599",
      "No. 20 Cr. 603 (PKC)",
      "2022 WL 336975",
      "747 F.3d 51",
      "482 F.3d 60",
      "843 F. App'x at 372",
      "720 F.3d 453"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case. The text is well-formatted and printed, with no visible handwriting or stamps. The content includes legal standards and references to previous court cases."
}