United States v. Sue Vue

MEMORANDUM

Sue Vue appeals his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1). Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , we affirm.

We see no reversible error in the prosecutor’s statement to the jury that “[t]here’s lots of evidence you don’t have.” This statement was nested in an argument that there was sufficient evidence to convict despite the “open questions” in the case and that the jury need not be certain of Vue’s guilt “beyond all possible doubt.” We thus see no indication that the prosecutor’s statement “so infected the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting conviction a denial of due process.” Darden v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 168, 181 , 106 S.Ct. 2464 , 91 L.Ed.2d 144 (1986) (quotation omitted).

Nor did the district court abuse its discretion by responding to juror inquiries by re-reading portions of the jury instructions. Vue does not contest that these instructions accurately stated the law. Because the district court did not mislead the jury with its response, there was no abuse of discretion. See United States v. Bussell, 414 F.3d 1048, 1058 (9th Cir.2005) (“[BJecause a defendant is not entitled to any…