United States v. Race Miner

Summary

The Court affirmed the defendants’ convictions and the denial of their Brady-based motion for a new trial. It held that the applicable RFS and BMC requirements unambiguously required biodiesel to satisfy the technical standards when RINs were generated or before a BMC credit was claimed, so the district court did not err by declining to give the requested jury instruction. It also rejected the sufficiency challenge and found that the undisclosed information concerning one testifying agent was immaterial and that Brady did not require disclosure concerning a nontestifying search-warrant affiant. Judge Mascott separately questioned whether the circuit’s ambiguity framework remains consistent with later Supreme Court guidance.