The following excerpt is from U.S. v. Armenta-Lopez, 8 F.3d 30 (9th Cir. 1993):
The challenged instruction stated: "An individual cannot claim he was entrapped simply because he was poor and could not resist the chance to make money." Armenta-Lopez does not and could not contend that this instruction did not accurately state the law. See United States v. Stenberg, 803 F.2d 422, 432 (9th Cir.1986). Rather, he argues that the instruction over-emphasized the government's view of the law, unnecessarily trivialized Armenta-Lopez's poverty, and gutted the entrapment defense. While Armenta-Lopez may not have wanted the instruction, we cannot conclude that the district court's decision to give a legally accurate instruction constituted an abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we reject Armenta-Lopez's challenge to the instruction.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.