United States v. Leonard Hollingsworth

MEMORANDUM

1. The Hollingsworths first challenge the district court’s denial of their motions for judgment of acquittal. When reviewing such a denial, we review de novo “whether sufficient evidence exists to support a guilty verdict.” See United States v. Stewart, 420 F.3d 1007, 1014 (9th Cir.2005).

The government’s evidence against the Hollingsworths included: (1) video recordings showing the Hollingsworths in Lowe’s stores watching employees use computers to complete return transactions; (2) identification cards the Hollingsworths had altered to circumvent Lowe’s computer-based loss protection system; and (3) store records indicating that the Hollingsworths used the same merchandise card to make purchases in multiple store locations. This evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict that the Hollingsworths knew or could have reasonably foreseen that their scheme would cause the use of a wire. See Pereira v. United States, 347 U.S. 1, 8-9 , 74 S.Ct. 358 , 98 L.Ed. 435 (1954) (holding that a person causes the use of a wire by “do[ing] an act with knowledge that the use of [a wire] will follow in the ordinary course of business, or where such use can reasonably be…