Livingston

MEMORANDUM **

I. SUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE

Because Livingston failed to make a Rule 29 motion for acquittal at the close of all evidence, we review his insufficiency of the evidence claim for plain error. 1 There is no such error here. Officer Jones’ testimony, which it was the jury’s prerogative to credit, 2 provided ample evidence connecting Livingston to the gun found in the park.

II. HEARSAY TESTIMONY

Throughout his direct testimony, Livingston sought to create the impression that the parole warrant was based on a charge police had concocted. Kallins’ questions to Gantt sought to buttress this inaccurate impression. Accordingly, the court did not abuse its discretion in allowing Gantt to testify that the charges were dropped because the witness was scared of the defendant. Although the court specifically admonished Livingston’s counsel to be careful, she boldly went ahead and “opened the door.”

III. SANCHEZ 4 ERROR

Forcing the defendant to testify that Government witnesses are lying is plain error. 5 Here, however, reversal is unwarranted because Livingston failed to show that this error affected his substantial rights.

Credibility issues were what this case was all…