United States v. Robert H. Hopkins, Jr. Thomas A. Oliver Robert C. Bonner William A. Lane Blynn L. Shideler

51 F.3d 283 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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-Appellant, v. Robert H. HOPKINS, Jr.; Thomas A. Oliver; Robert C. Bonner; William A. Lane; Blynn L. Shideler, Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-10283. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted March 15, 1995. Decided March 29, 1995. Before: CHOY, CANBY, and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 The Government appeals the district court's grant of the defendants' motions for new trial. It argues the district court incorrectly concluded pre-October 1984 conduct was inadmissible to prove violations of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1344 , which became effective on October 12, 1984. 1 3 We agree with the Government that some pre-October 1984 evidence was admissible. The ex post facto clause does not render inadmissible evidence of acts occurring before the effective date of Sec. 1344 as direct evidence to prove the existence and purpose of a bank fraud scheme executed…