With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". established that the government’s proof was sufficient to withstand the motion for judgment of acquittal: Maisonet had been sentenced to prison by the judge to whom he addressed the letter; he considered the sentence to be illegal; he charged that the judge was motivated by prejudice and racism; he addressed the letter to the judge’s home; and he said nothing in the letter about having the judge investigated or about seeking his removal. Id. Although the court in Maisonet indicated its agreement with the dissenting opinion in Barcley, there has been no appreciable inconsistency in the approach taken by the two courts. Indeed, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has cited both cases with approval. See, e.g., Martin v. United States, 691 F.2d 1235, 1240 (8th Cir.1982) (<HOLDING>), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1211, 103 S.Ct. 1207,

A: holding that evidence was sufficient to withstand a motion for acquittal where the threateninglanguage was not ambiguous
B: holding remedy for lack of sufficient corroborating evidence is acquittal
C: holding that there is no need for a formal motion for a judgment of acquittal in a bench trial because the plea of not guilty asks the court for a judgment of acquittal
D: holding trial court properly overruled defendants motion for judgment of acquittal where corroborating evidence existed
A.