Valery

MEMORANDUM **

Carlos Izurieta Valery appeals his conviction and 70-month sentence following a jury trial for conspiracy to launder monetary instruments in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956 (h), 1956(a)(3)(B) and 1956(a)(2)(B)(i), and laundering of monetary instruments in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (a)(3)(B) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Valery contends that the district court erred because it failed to instruct the jury on the proper mens rea required for the crime of aiding and abetting. To the extent Valery has not waived his right to object under the “invited error” doctrine, see United States v. Staufer, 38 F.3d 1103, 1109 (9th Cir.1994) (concluding that review generally denied when defendant proposes instruction which he later attacks on appeal), we review for plain error, see United States v. Boone, 951 F.2d 1526, 1541 (9th Cir.1991), and conclude that Valery’s argument is unpersuasive.

The district court’s aiding and abetting instruction in this case is Ninth Circuit Model Instruction No. 5.1 (1997 ed.), as modified per Valery’s request. Moreover, based upon our review of the record, all requisite elements of the…