United States v. Vincent Lee Olson, Cross-Appellee

87 F.3d 1324 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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, Cross-Appellant, v. Vincent Lee OLSON, Defendant-Appellant, Cross-Appellee. Nos. 95-30275, 95-30277. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted June 5, 1996. * Decided June 20, 1996. Before: BROWNING, WRIGHT and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 The defendant, Vincent Lee Olson, appeals his conviction by a jury for bank robbery. The United States cross-appeals the sentence imposed. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 , and we affirm. A. Jury Instruction 3 The defendant claims the district court erred by refusing to give his proposed jury instruction on eyewitness testimony. This claim lacks merit. 4 We review de novo whether jury instructions, in their entirety, adequately cover the defense's theory. United States v. Gomez-Osorio, 957 F.2d. 636, 642 (9th Cir.1992). The giving of jury instructions…