FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT N ove m be r 30, 2005 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 10701 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 4 - 6 0 2 6 8 - CR- W PD U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s R O S E L A N D E L O U I S , a .k .a . G ia n n ie T a r a h L a d o u c e u r , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe rn D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( N ove m be r30, 2005) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B IR C H an d H U L L , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: R osel ande L ou i s app ea l s herconv i ct i on s f or usi ng a f

al se and al t er ed2

p a s s p o r ti n a n a tt e mp tt o g a i n e n try i n t o th e U n i t e d St a t e s , i n v i o l a t i o n o f 1 8 U . S. C. § 1 54 3, and u si ng a f

orged, coun t er fe i t ed, al t er ed, and fal se l y m ade e ntry d o c u m e n t, in v io la tio n o f 1 8 U .S .C . § 1 5 4 6 ( a ) . L o u is r a is e s tw o is s u e s o n ap p e a l: ( 1) w he the rhe rs t a t e m e nt s m a de t o C us t om s of f i c e r s dur i ng a n i nt e rr oga t i on, w h ic h w e r e g iv e n w ith o u t M ir a n d a w a rn in g s , w e r e v o lu n ta ry a n d a d m is s ib le du ri ng her c ross -e xam i nat i on and the go vernm ent ’ s r ebut t al ca se ; and (2) w hether the di s tr i c tc our tabus e d i t s di s c r e t i on i n r e f us i ng t o gi ve a n i ns truc t i on on the d e f e n s e o f d u r e s s . A f

t e rr e v i e w , w e a f

f i r m. I . B AC KG RO UN D A . E v i d en ce a t M o ti o n to S u p p ress H e a r i ng A ft er h er i n d i ctm en to n th e ab o v e ch arg es, L o u i s fi l ed a m o t i o n t o su p p ress s ta te m e n ts th a t s h e m a d e to im m ig r a tio n o f f ic e r s d u r in g h e rs e c o n d a ry in s p e c tio n . L oui s ’ s m ot i on a l l e ge d tha tthe s t a t e m e nt s w e r e gi ve n w i thoutM i r a nda w a rni ngs and w er e i nv ol un t ary a nd the prod uctof coer ci on . T he go vernm entre spon ded that be c a us e L oui s ha d notbe e n i n c us t ody w he n s he m a de the s t a t e m e nt s , M i r a nda w a rni ngs w e r e notr e qui r e d. A tthe he a r i ng on L oui s ’ s m ot i on t o s uppr e s s , the di s tr i c tc our the a r d the fo l l o w i n g ev i d en ce fro m C u st o m s O ffi cer Jan n es L ew i s, w h o w as th e o n l y w i tn ess a t th e h e a r in g . L o u is d id n o t te s tif y .3

O n O c t obe r2, 2004, L oui s a rr i ve d i nt o the F t . L a ude r da l e a i rpor ton a f l i ght fr om P ort -au-P ri nce, H ai t i . Ini t i al l y, L ou i s w entt o p ri m ary i nspect i on w here I ns pe c t orR udy P a r e de s i nt e r vi e w e d he r . P a r e de s s us pe c t e d tha tL oui s ha d a ta m p e r e d v is a o rp a s s p o r t, a n d P a r e d e s s e n t L o u is to s e c o n d a ry in s p e c tio n . Pa r e d e s th e n a s k e d Lo u i s t o t e l l h i m h e rtru e n a me , b u tLo u i s b e c a me u n c o o p e r a tiv e a n d u n r e s p o n s iv e . L o u is in d ic a te d th a t s h e w a s u n c o m f o r tab le w ith I n s p e c to rP a r e d e s . A t th a t p o in t, O f f ic e rL e w is to o k o v e rth e in te r v ie w . O f f i c e rL e w i s e xpl a i ne d t o L oui s tha tO f f i c e rL e w i s w a s a uthor i z e d t o t a ke sw orn st at em ent s r egar di ng L ou i s’ s e ntry i nt o the U ni t ed S t at es , and thati thad been det erm i ned thatL ou i s possi bl y w as i nadm i ss i bl e. O ff i ce r L ew i s f

urther expl ai ned thati f L ou i s w as fe ar ful of re turni ng t o H ai t i , she w ou l d b e gi ven an o p p o r tu n ity to s p e a k w ith a n a s y lu m o f f ic e rr e g a r d in g h e rf

e a r s , a n d th a t L o u is shou l d i nd i ca t e w hether s he had such fear s bec ause she m i gh tno tgetanother o p p o rtu n i ty. L o u is r e s p o n d e d th a t s h e u n d e r s to o d , a n d a g r e e d to g iv e tru e a n d c o m p le te answ er s. L ou i s, ho w ever , t ol d O ff i ce r L ew i s thather nam e w as G i anni e T ar ah L a douc e ur . A f

t e rO f f i c e rL e w i s t ol d he rtha tthe i ns pe c t or s ha d c ont a c t e d he ra unt in th e U n ite d S ta te s , L o u is a d m itte d th a t h e rr e a l n a m e w a s R o s e la n d e L o u is . L o u is th e n e x p la in e d th a t s h e h a d g iv e n tw o p h o to g r ap h s o f h e r s e lf to h e ra u n t in4

H a iti, a n d th a t a n u n id e n tif ie d m a le h a d p r o v id e d h e rth e tr a v e l d o c u m e n ts p r e s e n te d to I n s p e c to rP a r e d e s . L o u is d id n o t e x p r e s s a n y f e a r s ab o u t r e tu rn in g to H a iti. L o u is a d m itte d th a t s h e k n e w th a t th e d o c u m e n ts h a d b e e n a lte r e d . O f f i c e rL e w i s f

urthe re xpl a i ne d tha tbe c a us e L oui s w a s a tthe bor de r , s he coul d n otl ea ve the i nspect i on ar eaand ent erthe ai rportprop erun t i l she w as a dm i tt e d i nt o the U ni t e d S t a t e s . F ur the r , w he ne ve rpe r s ons unde r goi ng i m m i grat i on exam i nat i on had t o l ea ve the i nspect i on ar eat o u se the re stroom , they w e r e e s c o r te d b y in s p e c to r s to p r e v e n t th e m f r o m e n te r in g th e a irp o r t. T he di stri ctcourtdeni ed L ou i s’ s m ot i on t o sup pres s, det erm i ni ng that L oui s ’ s i nt e rr oga t i on w a s r out i ne , notc us t odi a l , a nd thus di d notr e qui r e M i r a nda w a rni ngs . F ur the r , the di s tr i c tc our tf ound tha tL oui s ’ s s t a t e m e nt s w e r e f r e e l y a nd v o lu n ta r ily g iv e n . P r i ort o tr i a l , the gove rnm e ntl e a rne d tha tL oui s m a y ha ve be e n pl a c e d i n a h o ld in g c e ll d u r in g th e s e c o n d a ry in s p e c tio n , a n d th u s , s h e m a y h a v e b e e n in cu sto d y. B as ed o n th is in fo rm atio n , th e g o v er n m en t d ec id ed to u se L o u is’s s ta te m e n ts o n ly f

o rth e p u rp o s e o f

im p e a c h m e n t. B . E vi d e n c e at T r i al D ur i ng the gove rnm e nt ’ s c a s e - i n- c hi e f , O f f i c e rP a r e de s t e s t i f

i e d tha the in s p e c te d L o u is w h e n s h e a rr iv e d a t th e a irp o r t f r o m P o r t- a u - P r in c e , H a iti. L o u is5

ha nde d hi m tw o H a i t i a n pa s s por t s , one c ont a i ni ng a non- i m m i gr a ntvi s a a nd a C u s to m s D e c la r a tio n F o r m I - 9 4 , a ll w ith th e n a m e o f G ia n n ie T a r a h L a d o u c e u r . W hen P ar edes l oo ked atthe pass po rtcont ai ni ng the no n-i m m i grantvi sa , i tl oo ked a s i f the s e a l ha d be e n a l t e r e d. P a r e de s r e f e rr e d L oui s f

ors e c onda ry i ns pe c t i on. D u r in g th e d e f

e n s e p a r t o f

th e c a s e , L o u is te s tif

ie d ab o u t th e c o n d itio n s in H a i t i . S he f

ur the rt e s t i f

i e d tha ton O c t obe r2, 2004, he runc l e t ook he rt o the a i rpor t . A tthe a i rpor t , L oui s ’ s unc l e ga ve he rtr a ve l doc um e nt s tha tdi d notha ve he rna m e on the m . L oui s di d notknow w he r e s he w a s goi ng unt i l s he he a r d the a n n o u n c e m e n t f

o rh e rf lig h t. L o u is c o n c e d e d th a t: ( 1 ) th e tw o p a s s p o r ts th a t th e g o v e rn m e n t a d m itte d in to e vi de nc e w e r e the pa s s por t s s he ha d us e d; ( 2) the na m e on the pa s s por t s w a s not he r s ; ( 3) the pa s s por t s w e r e f a ke orf or ge d; a nd ( 4) s he f

i l l e d outthe I - 94 f

or m i n a f a k e n a m e . A f

te rp r e s e n tin g h e rd o c u m e n ts to a m a n in th e U n ite d S ta te s , L o u is w as as ked t o t ake ase at . L ou i s s atfor abo utan ho ur-a nd -a -hal f, and then a w om an es cort ed her t o a room and asked her t o t ake her c l othes off . T he w om an l ocked th e d o o ra n d le f

t h e ra lo n e in th e r o o m . A tab o u t5 : 3 0 p . m . , so m eo n e b ro u g h tL o u i s t o sp eak w i th O ffi cer P ared es. A ft eran i nt erpret erca m e i n, they a sked her i f s he w as aw ar e thatthe pass po rtw as nothe r s . L oui s a dm i tt e d tha ts he t ol d the m tha tthe na m e on the pa s s por tw a s not6

h ers. S h e st at ed th atth e ro o m w as fu l l o f o ffi cers an d th ato n e o f th em sai d “ Ju st s e nd he rba c k. S hi p he rba c k t o H a i t i . ” L oui s s t a t e d tha ts he s t a r t e d c ry i ng, a nd they t oo k h erback t o the room w here she had been hel d b ef ore. A f t e rthi s t e s t i m ony , L oui s ’ s de f e ns e c ouns e l r e ne w e d hi s obj e c t i on t o the a dm i s s i bi l i ty of

L oui s ’ s s t a t e m e nt s t o the of f i c e r s a nd r e que s t e d tha tthe gove rnm e ntbe pr ohi bi t e d f r om e l i c i t i ng the m dur i ng c r os s - e xa m i na t i on. T he di s tr i c tc our ts t a t e d tha ti tha d a l r e a dy f ound tha tthe s t a t e m e nt s w e r e f r e e l y a nd v o lu n ta r ily g iv e n a n d th a t it h a d n o t h e a r d a n y th in g th a t w o u ld c h a n g e th a t. S p e c if ic a lly , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t s ta te d “I th in k I a lr e a d y f o u n d th a t th e s ta te m e n ts w e r e f r e e ly a n d v o lu n ta r ily m a d e .” L ou i s c on t i nu ed t o t es t i fy , st at i ng thateventual l y s he w as es cort ed t o an area w here O ff

i ce r P ar edes qu es t i on ed her. T hey a sked her i f hernam e w as L adou ce ur, and w hen she t ol d them thati tw as , a “ l ady r epl i ed, ‘ [w ] el l , that ’ s notyour nam e. If y ou don’ tw a ntt o t e l l us y ourna m e , y ou know , w e a r e notgoi ng t o be t oo p le a s e d .’ A n d th e n o n e w a s y e llin g in to th e b a c k g r o u n d , y o u k n o w , ‘B a c k to H a iti. B ac k t o H ai t i . ’ ” L ou i s s t at ed thatshe bec am e upsetand st art ed cryi ng , and they t o l d h e rth a tth e y w e r e g o i n g t o b r i n g i n a s u p e r v i s o r . W h e n th e s u p e r v i s o rc a me i n, L ou i s t ol d h i m thatshe w as no tcom fort abl e w i th anyon e there , and l at er , Of f i c e rL e wi s c a m e i n a n d c o n t i n u e d th e i n t e r v i e w.7

L ou i s a dm i tt ed thatshe t ol d O ff i ce r L ew i s thather nam e w as G i anni e T ar ah L a douc e ur , tha tne i the rs he norhe rpa r e nt s w e r e l a w f ul U ni t e d S t a t e s c i t i z e ns , a nd thatshe pre se nt ed a pas sportand v i safor i nspect i on . L ou i s a dm i tt ed thataf t er be i ng a s ke d how s he gotthe pa s s por t s , s he t ol d O f f i c e rL e w i s tha ts he w e ntt o a phot ogr aphe ra nd t ook pa s s por tpi c tur e s , tha te ve ry thi ng e l s e w a s t a ke n c a r e of by s om e body e l s e , a nd tha ta m a n c a m e t o the hous e tw o t i m e s t o t a l k w i th he ra unt aboutthe pa s s por t s . L oui s t ol d O f f i c e rL e w i s tha ts he w a s nota w a r e tha tthe p a s s p o r t w a s ille g a l. L o u is f u r th e ra d m itte d th a t s h e e v e n tu a lly to ld O f f ic e rL e w is he rr e a l na m e . L oui s a l s o a dm i tt e d tha ts he t ol d O f f i c e rL e w i s tha ts he w a s not a f r a i d t o go ba c k t o he rc ountry , a nd di d nott e l l a ny of the of f i c e r s aboutthe i nc i de nt s i n H a i t i be c a us e s he w a s a f r a i d of the of f i c e r s be c a us e the y w or ke d f or th e g o v e rn m e n t. L oui s a l s o t e s t i f

i e d tha tthe r e a s on s he c a m e t o the U ni t e d S t a t e s a nd ga ve the i ns pe c t or s the f

a ke na m e on the pa s s por t s w a s be c a us e s he w a s be i ng pers ec ut ed and t ol d she w ou l d b e e ventual l y ki l l ed, and she w ant ed t o save herl i fe . O n c r os s - e xa m i na t i on, L oui s a dm i tt e d tha ts he l i e d t o the i ns pe c t or s about her c orre ctnam e a nd bi rth d at e. L ou i s a l so adm i tt ed thatshe knew thatthe entry d o c u m e n ts w e r e f

a ls e , b u t e x p la in e d th a t s h e s im p ly w a n te d to s a v e h e rlif e . L o u is deni ed thatthe C ust om s off i ce rs re ad a s t at em entt o h erexpl ai ni ng thati f s he w as8

af ra i d t o return t o h erow n cou ntry , she s ho ul d say so du ri ng the i nt ervi ew , and that i f s he express ed such fe ar , she w ou l d b e abl e t o speak confi dent i al l y t o ano ther o f f ic e rw h o w o u ld d e te r m in e h e rc la im . L o u is a ls o a d m itte d th a t s h e d id n o t te ll I n s p e c to rH a k im e o rO f f ic e rL e w is th a t s h e w a s a f r a id o f th e m . H ow e ve r , I ns pe c t orH a ki m e t e s t i f i e d tha the w a s the i nt e rpr e t e rdur i ng the se cond ary i nspect i on of L ou i s a nd thathe tra nsl at ed i nt o C re ol e the prov i si on that O ff i ce r L ew i s r ea d w hi ch st at ed thata per son w ho w as af ra i d t o return t o h er c o u n try s h o u l d d i s c l o s e s u c h f e a r s d u r i n g th e i n t e r v i e w . I n s p e c t o rH a k i me te s tif ie d th a t L o u is w a s a s k e d s e v e r a l tim e s w h e th e rs h e f e a r e d r e tu rn in g to H a iti, a n d e a c h t i me s h e r e s p o n d e d th a ts h e d i d n o th a v e s u c h f e a r s . I n s p e c t o rH a k i me a l s o s t a t e d tha tw he n a s ke d, L oui s s t a t e d tha ts he w a s nota f r a i d of hi m orof O ffi cer L ew i s. Inspec t or H aki m e a l so expl ai ned thatpass engers w er e never s tri p-se ar ched atthe bo rderdu ri ng an i m m i grat i on exam i nat i on , and thatthe m osti ntrusi ve se ar ch c o n d u c t e d w a s a p a t - d o w n s e a r c h o f a p a s s e n g e re x e c u t e d b y a n o f f i c e ro f th e s a me s e x . C . D u ress D efen se A f t e ra l l of the e vi de nc e , L oui s r e que s t e d tha tthe di s tr i c tc our ti ns truc tthe j u ry o n th e d e f

e n s e o f d u r e s s . T h e g o v e rn m e n ta r g u e d th a tth e e v i d e n c e h a d s h o wn9

tha tL oui s ha d a va i l abl e t o he ra num be rof l e ga l a l t e rna t i ve s othe rtha n br e a ki ng the l a w a nd tha ts he ha d nota tt e m pt e d t o pur s ue a ny of the m . T he gove rnm e nt f ur the ra r gue d tha tthe e vi de nc e e s t abl i s he d tha tL oui s ha d be e n unde rno i m m i ne nt thr e a torda nge r . T he di s tr i c tc our tde ni e d L oui s ’ s r e que s t e d i ns truc t i on, de t e r m i ni ng tha tL oui s ha d “ othe rr e a s onabl e l e ga l a l t e rna t i ve s ” tha n br e a ki ng the l a w. T he j ury c on vi ct ed L ou i s on b oth cou nt s. L ou i s then fi l ed a m ot i on for a new tri al , al l egi ng thatthe di stri ctcourterre d b y denyi ng her m ot i on t o i ss ue a dur e s s orc oe r c i on i ns truc t i on t o the j ury . T he di s tr i c tc our tde ni e d L oui s ’ s m ot i on f o ra n e w tr ia l. I I . DI S CUS S I ON A . S tate m en ts to C u st om s O ff i ce rs O n app ea l , L ou i s f

i rs tar gu es thather s t at em ent s t o C ust om s off i ce rs , w hi ch w e r e g iv e n w ith o u t M ir a n d a w a rn in g s , w e r e in v o lu n ta ry b e c a u s e s h e w a s m e n ta lly w e a ke ne d, i s ol a t e d, a nd ove rw he l m e d. S pe c i f i c a l l y , L oui s c ont e nds tha ts he : ( 1) h ad arri v ed i n th e U n i t ed S t at es aft er h av i n g b een b eat en , th reat en ed fo r m o n th s, a nd t ol d s he w oul d be ki l l e d i f s he r e turne d t o H a i t i ; ( 2) w a s l oc ke d i n a hol di ng c e ll, s tr ip - s e a r c h e d , a n d s tr ip p e d o f h e rp e r s o n a l e f

f e c ts ; ( 3 ) w a s ta k e n to a s m a ll c u b ic le f ille d w ith C u s to m s o f

f ic e r s , o n e o f

w h o m y e lle d “S e n d h e rb a c k to H a iti;”We apply a mix ed standa

rd of review to the district c ourt’s denial of a suppre ssion 1 motion, reviewingfinding s of fact for c lear error and theapplication of thelaw to those facts de novo. United States v. Mag luta, 418 F.3d 1166, 1182 ( 11th Cir. 2005). “Voluntarine ss is as much a leg al notion as a factual one”and thus, our review of voluntariness is de novo.” House l v. Head, 238 F.3d 1289, 1299 ( 11th Cir. 2001). 10 and (4) w as t erri fi ed of on e of the offi ce rs w ho i nt ervi ew ed her. 1 C us t odi a l s t a t e m e nt s m a de by a de f e nda ntw i thoutthe be ne f i tof M i r a nda w a rni ngs a r e nota dm i s s i bl e i n the pr os e c ut i on’ s c a s e - i n- c hi e f , butm a y be us e d f

or i m pe a c hm e ntpurpos e s , pr ovi de d tha tthe s t a t e m e nt s a r e vol unt a ry . S e e M c G r i f f v. D e p’ tof C orr s . , 338 F . 3d 1231, 1236 ( 11th C i r . 2003) , c e r t . de ni e d, 540 U . S . 1118, 1 2 4 S . C t. 1 0 6 5 ( 2 0 0 4 ) . E v e n th o u g h th e g o v e rn m e n t u s e d L o u is ’s s ta te m e n ts o n ly f o rim p e a c h m e n t p u rp o s e s , w e s till m u s t d e te r m in e w h e th e rh e rs ta te m e n ts to C u s to m s o f

f ic ia ls w e r e v o lu n ta ry .

“ W he n a de f

e nda ntc ha l l e nge s the vol unt a r i ne s s of a c onf e s s i on, the go vernm entbear s the bu rden of prov i ng , by a pre po nd er ance of the evi dence, that th e s ta te m e n t w a s v o lu n ta ry .” U n ite d S ta te s v . G r im e s , 1 4 2 F .3 d 1 3 4 2 , 1 3 5 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 1 9 9 8 ) ( c ita tio n s o m itte d ) . W h e th e rth e s ta te m e n t w a s v o lu n ta ry is e x a m in e d in l i ghtof the t ot a l i ty of

the c i r c um s t a nc e s . H ubba r d v. H a l e y , 317 F . 3d 1245, 1252 (11th C i r. ), ce rt . deni ed, 54 0 U . S . 95 1, 12 4 S . C t . 39 0 (20 03 ). “ A m on g the fa ct ors w e m us tc ons i de ra r e the de f e nda nt ’ s i nt e l l i ge nc e , the l e ngth of [ he r ] de t e nt i on, the na tur e of the i nt e rr oga t i on, the us e of a ny phy s i c a l f

or c e a ga i ns t[ he r ] , orthe us e of11

a n y p r o m is e s o rin d u c e m e n ts b y p o lic e .” I d . ( c ita tio n s o m itte d ) . T he r e i s a m pl e e vi de nc e f r om the r e c or d, a s out l i ne d above , t o s uppor tthe di stri ctcourt ’ s det erm i nat i on thatL ou i s’ s s t at em ent s t o the C ust om s off i ce rs w er e vo l un t ar i l y gi ven. Indeed, L ou i s a ss ured Inspect or H aki m e ( the i nt erpret er ) that she w as no taf

ra i d o f O ff

i ce r L ew i s or I nspect or H aki m e. F urther, L ou i s s t at ed that s h e w a s n o t a f

r a id to r e tu rn to H a iti. W e r e c ogni z e tha tL oui s c l a i m s tha ts he w a s s tr i p- s e a r c he d a nd puti n a room w i th o ff

i ci al s s ho ut i ng thatshe s ho ul d b e s entback t o H ai t i . H ow ever , I ns pe c t orH a ki m e t e s t i f i e d a ttr i a l tha tpa s s e nge r s w e r e ne ve rs tr i p- s e a r c he d dur i ng a n i m m i gr a t i on e xa m i na t i on. O f f i c e rL e w i s t e s t i f

i e d a tthe s uppr e s s i on he a r i ng th a t s h e h a d n o r e c o lle c tio n o f a n y o f f ic e ro rin s p e c to rte llin g L o u is th a t s h e s h o u ld be s e ntba c k t o H a i t i . I n a ny e ve nt , a s s um i ng of f i c e r s s t a t e d tha tL oui s s houl d be s e n t b a c k to H a iti, L o u is h a s f a ile d to s h o w h o w th o s e r e m a r k s w e r e c o e r c iv e . I n d e e d , L o u is to ld O f

f ic e rL e w is th a t s h e w a s n o t a f r a id to g o b a c k to H a iti. M o r e o v e r , th e r e i s n o e v i d e n c e i n th e r e c o r d s u g g e s t i n g th a tCu s t o ms o f f ic e r s u s e d p h y s ic a l f

o r c e o rth r e a te n e d L o u is , m a d e p r o m is e s o rin d u c e m e n ts to her, or tre at ed her i n an u np rofe ss i on al m anner. R ather, the evi dence s ho w s that L oui s w a s s a f

e i n the F or tL a ude r da l e a i rpor ta nd tha ta l though s he c oul d ha ve ap p l i ed fo r asyl u m , sh e i n st ead att em p t ed t o g ai n en try b y p resen t i n g fal seWe reviewa district cour t’s ref usal to g ive a requeste d jury instruction for abuseof 2 discretion. United States v. Ga rcia , 405 F.3d 1260, 1273 ( 11th Cir. 2005). “[W ]e may aff irm the judgment of the district court on a ny ground that finds support in the re cord.”Hig don v. J ackson, 393 F .3d 1211, 1218 (11th Cir. 2004) (c itation omitted). 12 do cum ent s. W e f

i nd no re vers i bl e e rr or i n the di stri ctcourt ’ s det erm i nat i on that L o u is ’s s ta te m e n ts w e r e v o lu n ta ry . B . D u ress D efen se L ou i s nextar gu es thatthe di stri ctcourterre d i n ref usi ng t o i nstructthe j ury o n th e d e f

e n s e o f d u r e s s . W e d is a g r e e .

2

“ In o rd er t o h av e th e d efen se su b m i tt ed t o a j u ry, a d efen d an tm u stfi rst pr oduc e orpr of

f e re vi de nc e s uf

f i c i e ntt o pr ove the e s s e nt i a l e l e m e nt s of the de f e ns e . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. M ont gom e ry , 772 F . 2d 733, 736 ( 11th C i r . 1985) ( c ita tio n o m itte d ) . “T h e th r e s h o ld b u r d e n is e x tr e m e ly lo w : T h e d e f e n d a n t is ent i t l ed t o h ave pres ent ed i nstruct i on s r el at i ng t o a theory of defe nse f or w hi ch the r e i s a ny f

ounda t i on i n the e vi de nc e . ” U ni t e d S t a t e s v. R ui z , 59 F . 3d 1151, 1154 ( 11th C i r . 1995) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m a r ks , br a c ke t s , e l i ps e s , a nd c i t a t i on o m itte d ) . T o est abl i sh a def

ense of du re ss , a def

endantm ustshow thatshe per form ed orc ons e nt e d t o the unl a w f ul a c tbe c a us e : ( 1) the de f e nda ntw a s unde runl a w f ul a nd pr e s e nt , i m m i ne nta nd i m pe ndi ng thr e a tof de a th ors e r i ous bodi l y i nj ury ; ( 2) the de f e nda ntdi d notne gl i ge nt l y orr e c kl e s s l y pl a c e he r s e l f i n a s i tua t i on w he r e s he13

w oul d be f

or c e d t o e nga ge i n c r i m i na l c onduc t ; ( 3) the de f e nda ntha d no re as on abl e l egal al t ernat i ve t o v i ol at i ng the l aw ; and (4) there w as a di re ctcausal r e la tio n s h ip b e tw e e n th e c r im in a l a c tio n a n d th e a v o id a n c e o f th e th r e a te n e d h a r m . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. D e l e ve a ux, 205 F . 3d 1292, 1297 ( 11th C i r . 2000) . W e ha ve p rev i o u sl y d i scu ssed th ese el em en t s o f th e d u ress d efen se as fo l l o w s: T he re qu i re m entof i m m edi ac y of the th re at i s ari go rous on e; [s i c] and i ti s c l ea r thatfe arof future bod i l y harm t o o n e’s sel f or t o o thers w i l l nots uf

f i c e . I n or de rtha tthe da nge rm a y be vi e w e d a s i m m i ne nt a n d i m p en di ng, i ti s or di na r i l y ne c e s s a ry t o s how tha tthe c oe r c i ng party w as pres ent . M oreover, the apprehen sion of i m m edi at e danger m u stco n t i n u e d u ri n g th e w h o l e tim e th e cri m e i s co m m i tt ed . F i n al l y, i f the a c c us e d ha d a r e a s onabl e oppor tuni ty t o a voi d c om m i tt i ng the i l l e ga l a c tw i thouts ubj e c t i ng hi m s e l f t o the thr e a t en ed h ar m , or s ubs e que nt l y i gnor e d a rea s onabl e oppor tuni ty t o e s c ape the s our c e of th e c o m p u ls io n , th e d e f e n s e o f d u r e s s is n o lo n g e ra v a ilab le . U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S i xty A c r e s i n E t ow a h C ounty , 930 F . 2d 857, 861 ( 11th C i r . 1991) ( c ita tio n o m itte d ) . T he S up re m e C ou rthas hel d thatun der a ny defi ni t i on of du re ss , “ i f there w a s a r e a s o n ab le , le g a l a lte rn a tiv e to v io la tin g th e la w , a c h a n c e b o th to r e f u s e to do the cr i m i nal ac tand al so t o avo i d the threa t ened harm , the defense [] w i l l fa i l . ” U n ite d S ta te s v . B a ile y , 4 4 4 U .S . 3 9 4 , 4 1 0 , 1 0 0 S . C t. 6 2 4 , 6 3 5 ( 1 9 8 0 ) . In thi s c as e, the evi dence does notsupp orta f i nd i ng thatL ou i s a ct ed un der an i m m edi at e threa tof death o r s er i ou s bod i l y i nj ury f rom arm ed gang s kno w n as the C hi m e r e s i n H a i t i a tthe t i m e s he pr e s e nt e d the f or ge d doc um e nt a t i on t o the14

C u s to m s o f

f ic e rin th e U n ite d S ta te s . A ls o , th e e v id e n c e d id n o t s h o w th a t it w o u ld ha ve be e n unr e a s onabl e f orL oui s t o a tt e m ptt o ge ta vi s a pr i ort o c om i ng t o the U n i t ed S t at es o r t o ap p l y fo r asyl u m o n ce sh e reach ed th e U n i t ed S t at es, an d th u s, sh e h ad reaso n ab l e l eg al al t ern at i v es t o v i o l at i n g th e l aw . T h erefo re, a d u ress in s tru c tio n w a s n o t w a rr a n te d . I I I . CONCL US I ON Af t e ra th o r o u g h r e v i e w o f th e r e c o r d o n ap p e a l a n d th e p a r t i e s ’ s b r i e f s , we d is c e rn n o r e v e r s ib le e rr o rin L o u is ’s tr ia l. T h u s , w e a f f ir m L o u is ’s c o n v ic tio n s . A FFI R M ED