United States v. Jael Ahumada

MEMORANDUM

Jael Sarai Orozco Ahumada appeals her jury convictions for knowingly and willfully making a false statement to obtain a United States passport, and using a passport obtained by false statement, in violation of the first and second paragraphs of 18 U.S.C. § 1542 . Ahumada challenges the district court’s denial of her proposed diminished capacity jury instruction. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion, United States v. Christian, 749 F.3d 806, 810 (9th Cir.2014), when it rejected the diminished capacity instruction. Diminished capacity is a defense to specific intent crimes; it allows a defendant to argue she was mentally incapable of forming. the culpable state of mind of the charged crime. United States v. Twine, 853 F.2d 676, 678-79 (9th Cir.1988). Here, the district court held that 18 U.S.C. § 1542 was a crime requiring specific intent. We have recently clarified that violations of the first and second paragraphs of 18 U.S.C. § 1542 require only general intent. United States v. Ye, 792 F.3d 1164 (9th Cir.2015). Ahumada therefore was not entitled to assert diminished capacity as a defense.…