Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): district court’s decision of whéther to give a jury instruction and the content of the instruction. See United States v. Abbas, 74 F.3d 506, 513 (4th Cir.1996). A court’s refusal to give a requested instruction is reversible error if the instruction “(1) was correct; (2) was not substantially covered by the court’s charge to the jury; and (3) dealt with some point in the trial so important, that failure to give the requested instruction seriously impaired the defendant’s ability to conduct his defense.” United States v. Lewis, 53 F.3d 29, 32 (4th Cir.1995). We conclude the district court provided an adequate specific intent instruction to the jury, and thus was not required to give an additional instruction on good faith. See United States v. Fowler, 932 F.2d 306, 317 (4th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Thus, this claim is without merit. II. 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that issue of inadequate jury instruction was waived because the instruction given was the one expressly requested by defense counsel (B) holding that in a criminal trial the trial court must correct or amend an improper instruction if the proper instruction is necessary for the jury to understand the case (C) holding that when no objection was made to jury instruction evidence to support finding based on instruction should be assessed in light of the instruction given (D) holding that a specific pretext instruction is not necessary (E) holding good faith jury instruction is not necessary when the court has given an adequate specific intent instruction
Output (English): holding that issue of inadequate jury instruction was waived because the instruction given was the one expressly requested by defense counsel