United States v. Mark Lee Murray

56 F.3d 74 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Mark Lee MURRAY, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-10124 United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted April 10, 1995. Decided May 11, 1995. Before: SNEED, SCHROEDER, and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Mark Lee Murray appeals his convictions for carjacking in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2119 and using a firearm during a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 924 (c). He argues that (i) conviction for both crimes violates the Double Jeopardy Clause, (ii) the district court misstated the "person or presence" element of carjacking in instructing the jury, (iii) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions, (iv) the carjacking statute is void for vagueness, and (v) the district court erred in denying Murray a sentence reduction based on acceptance of responsibility. We affirm. I. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS BELOW 3 On May 11,…