Jamison

MEMORANDUM

Stanley Edward Jamison appeals his jury trial conviction and sentence for bank *306 robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a), and violating the terms of his supervised release from a prior bank robbery conviction. We affirm the conviction and finding that Jamison violated his supervised release, but remand for resentencing.

Jamison first argues that the district court erred when it failed to define the term “intimidation” in its instruction on the elements of bank robbery. 4 Jami-son concedes he never requested the court to define the term intimidation; thus our review is for plain error. United States v. Anderson, 201 F.3d 1145, 1148 (9th Cir. 2000).

The failure to define words that are within the ordinary understanding of the jury is not error. See United States v. Garza-Juarez, 992 F.2d 896, 910 (9th Cir. 1993) (failure to define “possession” not plain error); United States v. Chambers, 918 F.2d 1455, 1460 (9th Cir.1990) (failure to define “knowingly” not plain error). The term “intimidation” is a term of general usage, easily understood by lay jurors. It is not a jurisdictional term; it is not a term of art. Rather, it is a term that ordinary speakers of…