United States v. Debouse

128 F. App'x 398
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedApril 20, 2005
Docket04-50593
StatusUnpublished

This text of 128 F. App'x 398 (United States v. Debouse) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Debouse, 128 F. App'x 398 (5th Cir. 2005).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Patrick Debouse appeals his conviction following a jury trial for being a felon in possession of a firearm. Debouse argues that the district court should have instructed the jury on transitory possession. De-bouse argues that the jury instruction he requested is supported by United States v. Panter, 688 F.2d 268, 269 (5th Cir.1982).

Panter is inapposite, however, because Debouse did not possess a firearm in self-defense. See id. at 272. Because the instruction Debouse requested incorrectly stated the law and was without foundation in the evidence, the district court did not abuse its discretion when it declined to use it. See United States v. Tannehill, 49 F.3d 1049, 1057-58 (5th Cir.1995); Panter, 688 F.2d at 269.

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Lester Giles Panter
688 F.2d 268 (Fifth Circuit, 1982)
United States v. Paul Douglas Tannehill
49 F.3d 1049 (Fifth Circuit, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
128 F. App'x 398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-debouse-ca5-2005.