discussed Cited as authority (quoted) United States v. Qualls we review de novo a denial of a defendant's jury instruction based on a question of law.

discussed Cited "see" United States v. Sarracino See United States v. Stands, 105 F.3d 1565 , 1576 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 120 , — L.Ed.2d - (1997); United States v. Bordeaux, 84 F.3d 1544, 1548 (8th Cir.1996); see also United States v. Walker, 524 F.2d 1125, 1127 (10th Cir.1975) (holding hostage to aid escape satisfies benefit element of kidnapping statute).

discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Burch See Government of the Canal Zone v. Burjan , 596 F.2d 690, 693-95 (5th Cir. 1979) (taking judicial notice of -12- government maps to determine whether charged offenses occurred within boundaries of Canal Zone); United States v. Lossiah , 537 F.2d 1250, 1251 (4th Cir. 1976) (approving trial court’s taking of judicial notice that town was within Cherokee Indian Reservation); see also United States v. Stands , 105 F.3d 1565 , 1575 (8th Cir.) (“[G]iven a particular piece of land, it is for the court, not the jury, to determine whether that land is in Indian country.”), cert. denied , 118 S. …

discussed Cited "see, e.g." United States v. Steve A. Burch See Government of the Canal Zone v. Burjan, *672 596 F.2d 690, 693-95 (5th Cir.1979) (taking judicial notice of government maps to determine whether charged offenses occurred within boundaries of Canal Zone); United States v. Lossiah, 537 F.2d 1250, 1251 (4th Cir.1976) (approving trial court’s taking of judicial notice that town was within Cherokee Indian Reservation); see also United States v. Stands, 105 F.3d 1565 , 1575 (8th Cir.) (“[Gjiven a particular piece of land, it is for the court, not the jury, to determine whether that land is in Indian country.”), cert. denied, 118 S.Ct. 120…