Legal Opinion

United States v. Naegele

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided February 27, 2008No. Criminal 05-0151 (PLF)PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on defendant Timothy D. Naegele’s motion for judgment of acquittal on the two remaining counts of the indictment, Counts 5 and 8, under Rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. Upon careful consideration of the legal arguments presented by counsel, orally and in their written submissions, and the record of the trial in this ease, the Court will grant the motion.

I. BACKGROUND

Defendant Timothy Naegele is an attorney licensed to practice law in California and in the District of Columbia. Naegele owns his own law…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Curley v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1947
  2. United States v. Robert B. Sutton, United States of America v. Mark A. SucherCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1986
  3. United States v. Stanley Weisz, United States of America v. Eugene Robert CiuzioCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1984
  4. United States v. Thomas E. ReeseCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1977
  5. United States v. Leo Darryl HarringtonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1997

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States v. Bravo-FernandezDistrict Court, D. Puerto Rico · 2011
  2. Naegele v. AlbersDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2015
  3. United States v. BurdenDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
  4. United States v. Yindeear-RomDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API