United States v. John Doe

Bad Law
705 F.3d 1134·2013 WL 363016·2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 2193
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 31, 201311-10067California10,203 words

Opinion

Opinion

Smith, J.

Defendant-Appellant John Doe appeals his conviction, following a jury trial, of conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, conspiracy to distribute cocaine, possession of methamphetamine with the intent to distribute, and possession of cocaine with the intent to distribute. On appeal, Doe raises a host of alleged errors which fall into four general categories: errors relating to Doe’s public authority defense, Sixth Amendment violations, discovery violations, and procedural errors at Doe’s sentencing.

Regarding the alleged public authority errors, we hold that the district court was correct in ruling that Dixon v. United States, 548 U.S. 1 , 126 S.Ct. 2437 , 165 L.Ed.2d 299 (2006), applies to Doe’s public authority defense. Thus, Doe had the burden of establishing the defense by a preponderance of the evidence, and it was not error for the district court to refuse to instruct the jury otherwise. While we find that the district court gave an incomplete and therefore erroneous jury instruction on public authority when it neglected to instruct the jury that Doe bore this burden, Doe never raised the issue before the district court, and the error does not rise to the level of…

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.