United States v. Lynn Charles Jenkins, United States of America v. Howard Springfield Stanley

Jenkins and Stanley were convicted of possessory and conspiracy offenses involv ing narcotic drugs. They appeal, challenging two jury instructions. We affirm.

The defendants were arrested in the course of a sale of heroin to an undercover agent. Their principal defense was their story that they believed that the 30 ounces of powder they were delivering in exchange for $24,000 cash was not heroin but a fraudulent substitute. Upon discovery that the substance was in fact heroin, the defendants expressed surprise that their confederate had deceived them instead of the intended victim of the swindle. The jury apparently did not accept this account.

The judge instructed the jury that the government had the burden of proving the specific criminal intent charged. However, the judge also instructed that “it is ordinarily reasonable to infer that a person intends the natural and probable consequences of acts knowingly done or knowingly omitted”, and gave a “deliberate” or “conscious” ignorance instruction patterned upon our recent en bane decision in United States v. Jewel, 9 Cir., 532 F.2d 697 , cert. denied, 426 U.S. 951 , 96 S.Ct. 3173 , 49 L.Ed.2d 1188 (1976).

The…