U.S. v. Pierotti

In prosecution on charge of making false statement in connection with purchase of firearm under 18 USC section 922(a)(6), Dist. Ct. did not err in giving “ostrich” instruction allowing jury to find that defendant “knowingly” made false statement under circumstances where he strongly suspected that he made false statement about non-existence of misdemeanor conviction of domestic violence and deliberately avoided truth in making such statement. Record showed that defendant originally (and correctly) answered “yes” to question as to whether he had been convicted of misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, but changed answer to “no” when prompted by computer to check his answers to all questions. Moreover, jury could properly find that defendant’s change from correct answer to wrong answer demonstrated either direct knowledge regarding existence of said conviction or deliberate avoidance of truth where defendant failed to read computer’s instructions as to how to answer said question.