Opinion ID: 734913
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Section 924 convictions after Bailey v. U.S.

Text: 27 After the conclusion of this trial, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Bailey v. U.S., --- U.S. ----, 116 S.Ct. 501 (1995), which changed the interpretation of the term use for purposes of Section 924. This reinterpretation, which effected a change in Ninth Circuit law, requires a reversal of appellant's Section 924 convictions. 2 Jury Instruction No. 39 in this case states: 28 a firearm is considered to be used/carried during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime if the firearm is present for protection and to facilitate the likelihood of success, whether or not it is actually used. Where a firearm is found in direct relation to narcotics, it is considered to be used/carried during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime even where the defendant is not present when the firearm is found by law enforcement officials. 29 This instruction, while correct under prior Ninth Circuit law, is no longer correct in light of Bailey. See, e.g., U.S. v. Hernandez, 80 F.3d at 1257; U.S. v. Willett, 90 F.3d 404, 407 (9th Cir.1996). Where the jury could have based its conviction on an improper understanding of the term use, the conviction must be overturned. U.S. v. Gonzalez, 93 F.3d 311 (7th Cir.1996); U.S. v. Thomas, 86 F.3d 647, 651 (7th Cir.1996). The evidence regarding the firearms, particularly the machine gun, indicates that the jury may have relied on mere storage or proximity of the weapon. Thus, the convictions on Counts 2, 8, and 28 cannot be upheld. 30