USA v. Miske, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAI‘I
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL J. MISKE, JR., 	(1)
Defendant.
Case No. 19-cr-00099-DKW-KJM
ORDER DIRECTING
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON
DEFENDANT MICHAEL J. MISKE
JR.’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT
OF ACQUITTAL
On July 2, 2024, after the close of the evidence in this case, Defendant
Michael J. Miske, Jr., for the second time, moved for a judgment of acquittal
pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29(a).1 	Miske did so, generally,
with respect to Counts 1, 4, 10-11, 15, and 21, and on specific grounds with respect
to Counts 2-3, 5-7, and 22.2
With respect to Count 2-3, 5-7, and 22, Miske made the following
arguments: (1) Counts 2 and 3 should be dismissed because the evidence admitted
at trial did not establish the “purpose” element of the offenses; (2) Counts 5 and 6
should be dismissed because the evidence admitted at trial did not establish
Johnathan Fraser had been kidnapped; (3) Count 7 should be dismissed because the
1 Miske previously moved for a judgment of acquittal following the close of the government’s
case-in-chief. 	Dkt. No. 1547. 	On June 10, 2024, the Court granted in part and denied in part
that first motion. 	Dkt. No. 1554.
2 Miske also renewed from his first motion arguments with respect to Counts 12-14 and 20.
Case 1:19-cr-00099-DKW-KJM Document 1699 Filed 07/15/24 Page 1 of 3
PageID.<pageID>

2
evidence admitted at trial did not establish that Miske offered cash to John Stancil
and Dae Han Moon in exchange for their agreement to murder Joe Boy Tavares;
and (4) Count 22 should be dismissed because the character letter in question had
not been altered so as to obstruct justice. 	In response, essentially, the government
argued that sufficient evidence had been admitted at trial to support each of the
challenged elements and/or issues.
Perhaps understandably, at the July 2, 2024 hearing, in making their
respective arguments, the parties did not cite specific admitted evidence to support
the same, such as by referencing exhibit numbers, trial transcripts, trial days, or
individual witness statements. 	The Court now affords the parties the opportunity
to do so. 	Specifically, on or before the close of business on Friday, July, 19,
2024, the parties may file briefs of no more than five (5) pages citing evidence
admitted during the trial that supports the arguments and/or representations made
at the July 2, 2024 hearing regarding Count 2-3, 5-7, and 22. 	Should the parties
rely upon trial testimony, they must provide specific line and page citations to the
relevant transcript(s). 	So it is clear, other than citation to evidence admitted
during the trial that supports the arguments and/or representations made at the
July 2, 2024 hearing regarding Count 2-3, 5-7, and 22, no further briefing,
including any legal argument, is permitted from either party.
Case 1:19-cr-00099-DKW-KJM Document 1699 Filed 07/15/24 Page 2 of 3
PageID.<pageID>

3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 15, 2024 at Honolulu, Hawai‘i.
___________________________
Derrick K. Watson
Chief United States District Judge
Case 1:19-cr-00099-DKW-KJM Document 1699 Filed 07/15/24 Page 3 of 3
PageID.<pageID>