United States v. Thomas Sampson

76 F.3d 390 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Thomas SAMPSON, Defendant-Appellant. No. 95-10163. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Dec. 6, 1995. * Decided Dec. 11, 1995. Before: SNEED, TROTT, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Thomas Sampson appeals his conviction after entering a conditional guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1). Sampson contends that the district court erred by finding that, as a matter of law, Sampson was not entitled to the defense of necessity. We review de novo a district court's decision to bar a necessity defense. United States v. Aguilar, 883 F.2d 662, 692 (9th Cir.1989), cert. denied, 498 S.Ct. 1046 (1991). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm. 3 In order to assert the necessity defense the defendant must show, among other things, that he was under imminent…