United States v. Charles Frederick Walker

5 F.3d 544 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Charles Frederick WALKER, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-50417. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 30, 1993. * Decided Sept. 7, 1993. MEMORANDUM *** Before: BRUNETTI, KOZINSKI and BOGGS ** , Circuit Judges. 1 The district court did not err in concluding the government proved the victim banks were federally insured. Though the prosecutor offered FDIC certificates dated before the robbery, he also offered testimony of bank employees to confirm that the bank was FDIC-insured during the robbery, Gov't ER at 8, 58. Such uncontradicted testimony establishes this element of the offense. United States v. Campbell, 616 F.2d 1151, 1153 (9th Cir.1980). 2 Nor did the district court err in refusing to give the special "Telfaire" jury instruction that defense counsel requested. See United States v. Telfaire, 469 F.2d 552, 558-59 (D.C.Cir.1972). "[T]rial…