Whether a district court's denial of a renewed Rule 29 motion for judgment of acquittal can be equated with a verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and whether rendering a verdict of guilt by denying a Rule 29 motion without allowing closing arguments violates due process

\.S" < .\ \ \ 1 .Whether a district court ’s denial of a renewed Rule 29 potion for judgment of acquittal darfbe 7equated with, or substituted for, a verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, in direct conflict with United States v. Martin Linen Supply Go,5 430 U.S. 564 (1977).c'\ \ ^ "-XA\ 2. Whether render in ga ve rd i ct of guilt by merely denying a renewed Rule 29 motion —without allowing the defendant the opportunity for closing arguments —violates the Fifth Amendment ’sg uarantee ofdue process, as established in Herring v. New York, 422 U.S. 853 (1975). \ V\\s/\ s.. S %\\ \ \ \ \ a\-r"-A \\\ \\ \ V" \ * 5 X\ (N 9 \rX& "A \\\ \