Opinion ID: 1439456
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: CCE Instruction

Text: Honken protests the district court erred by failing to instruct the jury it had to find unanimously the identity of the five persons Honken directed as part of the CCE. See 21 U.S.C. § 848(c)(2)(A) (requiring a defendant to have acted in concert with five or more other persons whom the defendant organized, supervised, or managed). Because [Honken] did not object to the instructions at trial, we review for plain error. United States v. Cuervo, 354 F.3d 969, 994 (8th Cir.2004), vacated on other grounds sub nom. ; Norman v. United States, 543 U.S. 1099, 125 S.Ct. 1049, 160 L.Ed.2d 994 (2005), aff'd on remand 427 F.3d 537 (8th Cir.2005). See United States v. Pirani, 406 F.3d 543, 549 (8th Cir.2005) (en banc); Fed.R.Crim.P. 51(b) and 52(b). In Cuervo, we held a district court's failure to give such a unanimity instruction under § 848(c)(2)(A)'s five or more other persons provision was not plain error. Cuervo, 354 F.3d at 995. The district court did not plainly err by failing to give such an instruction in Honken's case. [20]