United States v. Green ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                  IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    No. 02-30729
    Summary Calendar
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    versus
    ERIC K. GREEN,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Middle District of Louisiana
    USDC No. 01-CR-123-ALL-D
    --------------------
    March 11, 2003
    Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Eric Green appeals his conviction for possession of a
    firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. § 922
    (g)(1); he does not appeal his conviction and concurrent
    sentence for forcibly resisting a federal officer in violation of
    
    18 U.S.C. § 111
    (a).     See Yohey v. Collins, 
    985 F.2d 222
    , 224-25
    (5th Cir. 1993) (issues not raised on appeal are abandoned).
    Green contends that the district court erred by refusing to
    instruct the jury concerning the affirmative defense of
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
    except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
    R. 47.5.4.
    No. 02-30729
    -2-
    justification.    He argues that he was justified in possessing a
    gun in an attempt to prevent the gun’s unlawful owner from
    shooting an unidentified third person over an illegal drug debt.
    Green failed to show a present, imminent, and impending
    threat of death or serious bodily injury or that there was no
    reasonable lawful alternative to his possession of the gun.       See
    United States v. Panter, 
    688 F.2d 268
    , 269 (5th Cir. 1982);
    United States v. Gant, 
    691 F.2d 1159
    , 1163-64 (5th Cir. 1982).
    He therefore did not meet his burden of establishing an
    evidentiary foundation that would have entitled him to the jury
    instruction.     See United States v. Branch, 
    91 F.3d 699
    , 712 (5th
    Cir. 1996).    The district court did not abuse its discretion by
    refusing to give the requested jury instruction.     See United
    States v. Posada-Rios, 
    158 F.3d 832
    , 873-74 (5th Cir. 1998).      The
    judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
    AFFIRMED.