Opinion ID: 754213
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Charge to Jury Regarding Use Under Section 924(c).

Text: 8 Munoz contends this Court should vacate his conviction under § 924(c)(1) because the trial court's charge to the jury defining use was erroneous in light of Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137, 116 S.Ct. 501, 133 L.Ed.2d 472 (1995). Section 924(c)(1), in relevant part, imposes a five-year term of imprisonment upon any person who during and in relation to any ... drug trafficking crime ... uses or carries a firearm. 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) (1997). In Bailey, the Supreme Court ruled that the term use in § 924(c)(1) means active employment of a firearm by the defendant in a manner that makes the firearm an operative factor in relation to the predicate offense. Bailey, 516 U.S. at 143, 116 S.Ct. at 505. We agree the district court's charge on use was erroneous in light of Bailey. However, for the reasons stated below, we find the error to be harmless. 9 In defining use for the jury, the district court's charge stated, in part: 10 Now, I have to give you some matters of definition. I think to simplify things I am going to ask you to look at the third line where it says, did use and carry. Ignore the word carry. I am simply going to instruct you about use. The question is did the defendant use the firearms, or any of them, during and in relation to drug trafficking crimes. 11