United States v. James Lloyd Painter

983 F.2d 1079 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Lloyd PAINTER, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-10531. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 20, 1992. * Decided Jan. 11, 1993. Before WIGGINS, O'SCANNLAIN and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Defendant James Lloyd Painter appeals from the district court's denial of his motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence. Painter contends that the district court erred in finding that there was no newly discovered evidence, that he had not been diligent in locating the evidence, and that a new trial would probably not result in an acquittal. We have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm. BACKGROUND 3 On March 21, 1991, a jury convicted James Painter of possession of an unregistered, sawed-off shotgun in violation of 26 U.S.C. §§ 5841 , 5861(d), and 5871. A tip from a…