Continuing urgent danger is necessary for jury instruction on justification defense in firearm possession case

JURY INSTRUCTION United States v. Butler, No. 06-5027, ___ F.3d ___ (10th Cir. May 7, 2007)(N.D. Oklahoma). Appeal of conviction for being felon in possession of firearm and being armed career criminal in possession of firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). HELD: District court did not err in denying defendant’s requested jury instruction on defense of justification (i.e., necessity or duress). Where defendant claimed to have taken possession of firearm from third party under circumstances suggesting that if he had not done so that party would have killed him, and where defendant’s evidence indicated that he kept that firearm for two days after threat of harm dissipated before surrendering firearm to law enforcement officers, defendant’s evidence was insufficient to permit jury to reasonably find continuing urgent danger necessary for jury instruction on justification defense. Read the opinion here.