United States v. Elmer L. Nakiso, II

26 F.3d 134 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Elmer L. NAKISO, II, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-10514. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 13, 1994. Decided May 27, 1994. Before: FARRIS, BEEZER, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 The appeal questions 1) the sufficiency of the evidence to convict, 2) the failure to give requested instructions on duress, necessity, and mere presence, and 3) sentencing Nakiso as a career criminal by referring to the indictment and guilty plea from one of his prior convictions. 3 We review sufficiency challenges in the light most favorable to the prosecution and determine whether "any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." United States v. Medina, 940 F.2d 1247, 1250 (9th Cir.1991). Our careful review of the record satisfies us that under even a less restrictive standard,…