Davis

MEMORANDUM *

John Henry Davis appeals his conviction and sentence for witness tampering under *355 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (b)(3). The parties are familiar with the facts of the case, so we repeat them here only to the extent necessary to explain our decision. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm the conviction, but order a limited remand to correct the district court’s handling of the repayment of the Federal Public Defender’s fees incurred in representing Davis. Davis raises six issues, which we discuss in turn below.

1. Davis’s Acquittal on the Underlying Offense

Davis contends that his witness tampering conviction must be vacated because the district court granted his motion for judgment of acquittal on the underlying charge that Davis made a false statement in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 . We disagree. The witness tampering statute prohibits preventing a third party from communicating to a law enforcement officer information “relating to the commission or possible commission of a Federal offense.” 18 U.S.C. § 1512 (b)(3) (emphasis added). The plain language of the statute makes clear that a conviction is not required. See United States v. Baldyga, 233 F.3d…