United States v. Carl Huerd

988 F.2d 124 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Carl HUERD, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-30358. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Feb. 4, 1993. * Decided Feb. 10, 1993. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington; No. CR-91-2064-AAM, Alan A. McDonald, District Judge, Presiding. E.D.Wash. AFFIRMED. Before TANG, KOZINSKI and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Carl Huerd appeals his jury conviction on one count of knowingly and intentionally making a building which he managed or controlled available for the purpose of unlawfully storing, distributing, or using a controlled substance, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 856 (a)(2). Huerd challenges jury instructions defining "knowledge" and "purpose," as those words are used in the statute. Huerd also attacks both the district court's decision to instruct the jury on deliberate ignorance and the…