Opinion ID: 359736
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Requests for Instructions Concerning Conduct

Text: 12 Not Prohibited by § 656. 13 The appellant submitted numerous requests for jury instructions to the trial court, two of which were concerned with giving examples of conduct not prohibited by § 656. 5 The trial court chose not to use the requested charges which specified that maladministration and bad judgment were not crimes under § 656; instead, a comprehensive instruction on intent was given in language of the court's own choosing. 6 The trial court is under no obligation to use the language suggested by counsel provided that its charge, taken as a whole, correctly states the law. United States v. Stokes, 506 F.2d 771, 773 (5th Cir. 1975). The instructions given by the court regarding intent reflect a correct statement of the law. The jury could not have found, on the basis of those instructions, the appellant guilty merely because he committed acts that unintentionally deprived the bank of funds. See United States v. Scheper, 520 F.2d 1355, 1358 (4th Cir. 1975). In some other situation it might be advisable for the trial court to instruct on what acts the charged crime does not include, but this is not such a case. 14