United States v. Eugene Morris, 404 F. App'x 916

Morris, a former prison guard, was convicted by jury of submitting a false Use of Force Report under 18 U.S.C. § 1519; acquitted on counts 1 and 3.
He appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for a judgment of acquittal.
Morris contends there was no ongoing federal investigation at the time of the report submission.
The government argues § 1519 does not require proof of an ongoing investigation and prior circuits have rejected Morris’s view.
The defense argues potential denial of acquittal due to inconsistent verdicts; the government argues consistency is not required if the evidence supports conviction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Does §1519 require proof of an ongoing investigation?	Morris contends ongoing investigation required	Government says no such requirement; other circuits agree	No clear requirement; no plain error in district court's ruling
Are the verdicts from Morris and co-defendant Jewett inherently inconsistent?	Inconsistency suggested by co-defendant’s acquittal	Inconsistency does not bar conviction if evidence supports it	No reversible error; evidence supports Morris's conviction regardless of inconsistencies

United States v. Lanham, 617 F.3d 873 (6th Cir. 2010) (rejection of Morris’s ongoing-investigation argument)
United States v. Hunt, 526 F.3d 739 (11th Cir. 2008) (rejects requirement of ongoing investigation for §1519)
Puckett v. United States, 129 S. Ct. 1423 (Supreme Court 2009) (plain-error review framework; forfeited errors)
United States v. Geiger, 190 F.3d 661 (5th Cir. 1999) (sufficiency of evidence standard for verdicts)
United States v. Zuniga-Salinas, 952 F.2d 876 (5th Cir. 1992) (coconspirator acquittal may result from leniency or compromise)
United States v. Montes, 602 F.3d 381 (5th Cir. 2010) (reciting sufficiency standard; upholds conviction where evidence adequate)