United States v. Scott

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-31347
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
LEON SCOTT,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Louisiana
USDC No. 00-CR-125-ALL-D
--------------------
July 18, 2002
Before REAVLEY, DAVIS and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Leon Scott appeals his conviction for possession of a
firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 922(g)(1) and possession of an unregistered sawed-off shotgun
in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d). He argues that the district
court erred in refusing to instruct the jury concerning the
affirmative defense of justification. He argues that he was
justified in temporarily possessing a gun in an attempt to defend

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 01-31347
-2-
himself because he believed that he faced a real and impending
threat of physical bodily harm from Shedrick Williams and Terry
Wilson. Scott has not shown that the district court abused its
discretion in refusing to give the requested jury instruction.
See United States v. Garcia Abrego, 141 F.3d 142, 153 (5th Cir.
1998). Scott did not meet his burden of proof to establish that
he was entitled to the jury instruction. Scott did not show that
he was under an imminent or impending threat causing apprehension
of death or serious bodily injury or that there was no reasonable
lawful alternative to committing the criminal act. See United
States v. Posada-Rios, 158 F.3d 832, 873 (5th Cir. 1998). The
record indicates that the victims were not armed with any
weapons, that Scott was inside of his apartment, and that Scott
could have remained inside of the apartment or called the police.
Therefore, the district court did not abuse its discretion in
finding that Scott was not entitled to the requested jury
instruction. See id. at 873.
AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --