Herring

MEMORANDUM **

A jury found Herring guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1). Herring appeals from the district court’s judgment of conviction and imposition of a sentence. The district court had jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3231 , and we have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . In this memorandum disposition, we affirm Herring’s conviction. We will address Herring’s challenges to his sentence in a future disposition.

“We review de novo whether the jury instructions accurately define the elements of a statutory offense and whether the jury instructions adequately cover a defendant’s proffered defense. We review for abuse of discretion the district court’s ultimate formulation of the instructions.” United States v. Hicks, 217 F.3d 1038, 1045 (9th Cir.2000) (citations omitted). “Whether the required factual foundation exists to support a requested jury instruction is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.” United States v. Carrasco, 257 F.3d 1045, 1050 (9th Cir.2001).

Herring contends the “constructive possession” instruction was improper because, he asserts, it permitted the jury to convict if it merely found that he…