United States v. Jesus Eduardo Meraz-Solomon

ORDER

The memorandum disposition filed April 7, 1993, 990 F.2d 1263 , is redesignated as a per curiam opinion. Appellee’s request for publication is granted.

OPINION

Jesus Eduardo Meraz-Solomon (Meraz) appeals his conviction, following entry of a conditional guilty plea, for importation of a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 952 and 960. Meraz contends that the district court erred by ruling that he had the burden of proving his duress defense by a preponderance of the evidence. 818 F.Supp. 1320 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

Whether a defendant has the burden of proving his duress defense by a preponderance of the evidence is a question of law which we review de novo. United States v. Dominguez-Mestas, 929 F.2d 1379, 1381 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 419 , 116 L.Ed.2d 440 (1991).

Due process requires that the prosecution prove beyond a reasonable doubt every element of the crime with which the defendant is charged. Id. at 1382 ; Walker v. Endell, 850 F.2d 470, 472 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 926 , 109 S.Ct. 309 , 102 L.Ed.2d 328 (1988). Where a statute identifies knowledge as the only mental element…