United States v. Kyle Wick, 697 F. App'x 507

Kyle Wick was tried on counts including manufacturing/dealing firearms without a license (18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(1)(A)) and separate machinegun-related counts under the National Firearms Act; the jury convicted only on the § 922 count.
The Government’s theory included sales of demilled Uzi receivers (cut into pieces) and sales of complete Uzi parts kits.
At the close of the Government’s case, Wick moved under Rule 29 for judgment of acquittal, arguing demilled receivers cannot be “firearms” under 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(3). The motion was denied.
After conviction, Wick renewed his Rule 29 motion and also moved for a new trial under Rule 33, arguing misjoinder and prejudicial spillover from machinegun evidence to the firearm count.
The district court denied both post-trial motions; the Ninth Circuit reviewed the sufficiency of the evidence de novo as to statutory interpretation and reviewed the Rule 33 denial for abuse of discretion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence was sufficient to convict under § 922(a)(1)(A) for selling items that qualify as a “firearm”	Wick: demilled receivers cannot be “firearms” as a matter of law	Government: sales included complete Uzi parts kits that could readily be converted to fire a projectile, satisfying § 921(a)(3)	Evidence sufficient; conviction stands because kits could be readily converted into functioning firearms
Whether a demilled receiver alone can be a “firearm” under § 921(a)(3)	Wick: demilled receiver not a firearm	Government: argued alternative theory based on kits; did not need to prove demilled receivers were firearms here	Court did not decide the legal question because conviction rested on parts kits evidence
Whether misjoinder (machinegun and firearm counts) required a new trial due to prejudicial spillover	Wick: joinder allowed machinegun evidence to prejudice the firearm count	Government: evidence on acquitted counts was also relevant to convicted count; no need to segregate	No abuse of discretion; no prejudicial spillover; Rule 33 denial affirmed
Standard of review for statutory interpretation and sufficiency claims	Wick: challenged trial rulings	Government: relied on sufficiency and relevance of evidence	Court applied de novo review to statutory interpretation questions and sufficiency standard to Rule 29 motion; affirmed conviction

United States v. Stoddard, 150 F.3d 1140 (9th Cir. 1998) (standard for sufficiency-of-the-evidence review)
United States v. Bert, 292 F.3d 649 (9th Cir. 2002) (de novo review for statutory interpretation issues)
United States v. Hinkson, 585 F.3d 1247 (9th Cir. 2009) (Rule 33 denial reviewed for abuse of discretion)