Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eddie C. BRITT, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2004-11-24
Citations: 113 F. App'x 843
Docket Number: No. 03-30582
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eddie C. BRITT, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before: KOZINSKI, FERNANDEZ and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 113
Pages: 843–844

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Eddie C. BRITT, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 03-30582.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Oct. 8, 2004.
Decided Nov. 24, 2004.
Kris A. Mclean, Esq., Office of the U.S. Attorney, District of Montana, Missoula, MT, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Melissa Harrison, Federal Defender, Missoula Branch Office, Missoula, MT, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before: KOZINSKI, FERNANDEZ and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
The relevant jury instruction, which the parties agreed upon and the government has not challenged on appeal, required the government to prove defendant used force in assaulting, intimidating and interfering with the postal worker. The instruction stated that a defendant uses force only when he "reasonably causes a person to fear immediate bodily harm."
Having agreed to the instruction, the prosecutor was not entitled to argue that the government need not prove the worker's state of mind. The district court therefore abused its discretion in overruling defendant's objection to the prosecutor's argument. See United States v. Etsitty, 130 F.3d 420, 424 (9th Cir.1998) (per curiam) (noting the appropriate standard of review). We are not convinced the error was harmless.
REVERSED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.