United States v. Robert Pitner, United States of America v. David M. Hanson

967 F.2d 595 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff/Appellee, v. Robert PITNER, Defendant/Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff/Appellee, v. David M. HANSON, Defendant/Appellant. Nos. 90-10299, 90-10318. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Feb. 10, 1992. Decided July 8, 1992. As Amended Nov. 2, 1992. 1 Before CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges, and BURNS, * Senior District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM DISPOSITION ** 3 Pitner and Hanson appeal their convictions and sentences. Both defendants contend the district court erred by failing to instruct the jury properly regarding knowledge and willfulness, mens rea elements of the crimes for which they were convicted. See 31 U.S.C. §§ 5322 (b) and 5324(3). Pitner also contends the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction because the government's evidence did not establish that he had knowledge of the bank's currency…