United States v. David H. Chiang

68 F.3d 481 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. David H. CHIANG, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50529. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Sept. 13, 1995. Decided Oct. 12, 1995. Before: BOOCHEVER, T.G. NELSON, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 David H. Chiang was convicted on five counts of bribing a public official in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 201 (b)(1) (1988). He was sentenced to a concurrent term of twenty-seven months on each count. He appeals his conviction. 3 Chiang argues that the district court should have acquitted him because he was entrapped as a matter of law by government agents. The existence of entrapment is ordinarily a question of fact for the jury. United States v. Lessard, 17 F.3d 303, 305 (9th Cir. 1994). Chiang requested and received a jury instruction on the law of entrapment. The jury found Chiang guilty. 4 Chiang never requested that the…