United States v. Mills, Criminal No. 2024-0332

Nahvarj Mills was convicted by a jury on 24 of 27 counts, including cyberstalking, unlawful possession of a firearm, assault with a dangerous weapon, and unlawful publication.
Mills was acquitted on three charges related to an incident on January 23, 2024.
On March 24, 2025 (over three months after the verdict), Mills filed a Renewed Motion for Judgment of Acquittal or, alternatively, for a Mistrial.
Mills challenged the reliability of victim testimony, admissibility of gun evidence, and introduction of other "bad acts" evidence at trial.
The government argued all motions were untimely and meritless.
The court denied both post-verdict motions as untimely and, in the alternative, on the merits.

Issue	Mills' Argument	USA's Argument	Held
Timeliness of post-verdict motions	Motions should be considered post-verdict	Motions are 80 days late and untimely	Motions denied as untimely
Sufficiency and credibility of evidence	Victim's testimony unreliable and contradicted	Jury resolves credibility, evidence was sufficient	No basis for acquittal
Admissibility of firearm evidence	Gun evidence was impermissible character evidence	Evidence was corroborative, not character-based	Gun evidence properly admitted
Admission of "other acts" testimony	Prior acts evidence was unfairly prejudicial	Testimony was highly probative, not unfairly prejudicial	Testimony properly admitted

United States v. Treadwell, 760 F.2d 327 (D.C. Cir. 1985) (court must defer to jury's credibility findings and reasonable inferences)
United States v. Campbell, 702 F.2d 262 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (jury presumed to evaluate credibility appropriately)
United States v. Weisz, 718 F.2d 413 (D.C. Cir. 1983) (acquittal only if reasonable juror must have doubt)
United States v. Long, 905 F.2d 1527 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (tremendous deference to jury verdicts post-trial)
United States v. Lewis, 626 F.2d 940 (D.C. Cir. 1980) (broad deference to trial court on severance and evidence decisions)