Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Marat Movsesyants, 98-2874 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 98-2874 Visitors: 5
Filed: Mar. 18, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 98-2874SD _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * * Marat Movsesyants, * * Appellant. * _ Appeals from the United States District Court for the District No. 98-2878SD of South Dakota. _ [UNPUBLISHED] United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * * Armen Atayants, * * Appellant. * _ No. 98-2879SD _ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * * Ivan Kovalev, * * Appellant. * _ No. 98-2880SD _ United States of America,
More
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _____________ No. 98-2874SD _____________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * * Marat Movsesyants, * * Appellant. * _____________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the District No. 98-2878SD of South Dakota. _____________ [UNPUBLISHED] United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * * Armen Atayants, * * Appellant. * _____________ No. 98-2879SD _____________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * * Ivan Kovalev, * * Appellant. * _____________ No. 98-2880SD _____________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * v. * * Alex Nagorniuk, * * Appellant. * _____________ Submitted: March 9, 1999 Filed: March 18, 1999 _____________ Before FAGG, LAY, and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judges. _____________ PER CURIAM. Marat Movsesyants, Armen Atayants, Ivan Kovalev, and Alex Nagorniuk (collectively the appellants) appeal their convictions on felony charges related to a motor vehicle theft ring. We affirm. -2- The appellants raise several contentions related to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting their convictions. We reject all of these contentions. First, the record contains substantial evidence to support the jury's verdicts. Second, we conclude the district court did not commit reversible error in denying the motions for dismissal of the indictment, for severance, for judgment of acquittal, and for new trial, or in instructing the jury about the conspiracy. Third, the appellants' assertions that the government failed to reveal exculpatory evidence and the district court improperly admitted evidence against all of the coconspirators are either unsupported by the record, otherwise without legal merit, or both. Having carefully reviewed the record, we are satisfied the district court correctly resolved each of the appellants' claims and an extended opinion by this court would have no precedential value. We thus affirm the appellants' convictions. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. -3-
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer