With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". apprised the jury of the need to find an affirmative act in order' to convict for evasion. In United States v. Fournier, 861 F.2d 148 (7th Cir.1988), the Seventh Circuit upheld a jury instruction virtually identical to the one provided by the district court in the Instant case. The district court in Fournier instructed the jury that the government needed to prove that the defendant “attempted] to evade or defeat a tax,” which required a showing that the defendant “willfully did some act” in- furtherance of an intent to evade his taxes. 861 F.2d at 151. The Sev enth Circuit approved this instruction, concluding that- “the phrase ‘willfully did some act’ is a fair and adequate- synonym for the. term ‘affirmative act.’ ” Id.; see also United States v. Mal, 942 F.2d 682, 686 (9th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). The defendant relies on United States, v.

A: holding that instruction that omitted elements of crime that defense had conceded was error although not plain error
B: holding that failure to request jury instruction about manner in which evidence was obtained was not error and thus did not constitute ineffective assistance because defendant was not entitled to instruction
C: holding that instruction requiring jury to find that defendant made affirmative attempt to evade taxes defined as some act willfully done did not amount to plain error
D: holding that it was not plain error for the court not to give a self defense jury instruction where the defendant did not request one
C.