United States v. Saunders

Full title: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff--Appellee, v. Joann SAUNDERS…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Feb 19, 2004

88 F. App'x 200 (9th Cir. 2004)

Opinion

Submitted February 11, 2004. ^*

* This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho, B. Lynn Winmill, District Judge, Presiding.

Page 201.

Wendy Olsen, United States Attorney's Office, Boise, ID, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Greg S. Silvey, Esq., Boise, ID, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before D.W. NELSON, KLEINFELD, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM ^**

** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

"[A] specific good faith instruction is unnecessary where the court has already adequately instructed the jury as to specific intent." ¹ Because the district court's instruction as to specific intent was accurate and adequately covered Ms. Saunders's theory of the case, ² the district court did not abuse its discretion ³ in refusing to include Ms. Saunders's proposed instruction as to a good faith defense.

1 United States v. Dees, 34 F.3d 838, 842 (9th Cir.1994); see also United States v. Lorenzo, 995 F.2d 1448, 1455 (9th Cir.1993).

2 See United States v. Romero-Avila, 210 F.3d 1017, 1023 (9th Cir.2000) (holding that it is not reversible error to reject a defendant's proposed instruction on his theory of the case if other instructions adequately cover the defense theory).

3 See United States v. Franklin, 321 F.3d 1231, 1240-41 (9th Cir.2003).

AFFIRMED.