Tierney

United States v. Tierney

Good Law
38 F. App'x 424
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 19, 2002No. 01-10187; D.C. No. CR-00-00123-PMP/RJJCalifornia484 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Defendant Edward Tierney (“Tierney”) is currently serving a three-year period of supervised probation with conditions for Unlawful Mailing of Injurious Article in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1716 (a) and Unlawful Transportation and Sale of Reptile in violation of the Lacey Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 3372 (a)(2)(A) & 3373(d)(2). Tierney argues that the district court committed a reversible error by failing to allow a jury instruction on entrapment and that the Nevada state law upon which the Lacey Act offense was based was unconstitutionally vague.

The district court had jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3231 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Because the parties are disputing whether the required factual foundation exists for a proposed jury instruction, this court reviews for abuse of discretion. U.S. v. Wills, 88 F.3d 704, 715 (9th Cir.1996). A district court’s interpretation and construction of a statute is a question of law reviewed de novo in this circuit. Silver Sage Partners, Ltd. v. City of Desert Hot Springs, 251 F.3d 814, 819 (9th Cir.2001).

We hold that the district court did not err by denying Tierney’s proposed jury instruction on entrapment and that…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.