United States v. Jose Angel Ureno-Mota

70 F.3d 1281 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Jose Angel URENO-MOTA, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-50453. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Nov. 14, 1995. * Decided Dec. 4, 1995. Before: FARRIS, BRUNETTI, and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Ureno-Mota appeals the district court's refusal to instruct the jury on his duress defense. 3 There is no obligation to instruct a jury on duress if no reasonable jury could conclude that the defendant proved each element of the duress defense. United States v. Shapiro, 669 F.2d 593, 596-97 (9th Cir.1982). The elements of duress include: "(1) an immediate threat of death or serious bodily injury; (2) a well-grounded fear that the threat will be carried out; and (3) no reasonable opportunity to escape the threatened harm." United States v. Becerra, 992 F.2d 960, 964 (9th Cir.1993). I. Immediate Threat 4 A threat is immediate only if harm is…