Case ID: f-appx_235/html/0654-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Cristobal HERNANDEZ-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 06-50141.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 13, 2007 .
    Filed Aug. 22, 2007.
    Carol C. Lam, AUSA, Lawrence E. Spong, Esq., USSD — Office of the U.S. Attorney, San Diego, CA, for PlaintiffAppellee.
    Brian P. Funk, Esq., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before: KLEINFELD, SILVERMAN, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Cristobal Hernandez-Hernandez appeals from his jury-trial conviction for attempted entry after deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Hernandez-Hernandez contends that it was error for the district court to use jury instructions that placed the burden of proof on him to prove his duress defense. We disagree. See Dixon v. United States, — U.S. -, 126 S.Ct. 2437, 2447, 165 L.Ed.2d 299 (2006); United States v. Leal-Cruz, 431 F.3d 667, 673 (9th Cir.2005).

We also conclude that the Government’s analogies during closing argument did not result in plain error. See United States v. Sine, 493 F.3d 1021, 1037-40 (9th Cir.2007).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.