United States v. Baker, 807 F.2d 427 (1986) p263.

D was selling counterfeit watches. He knew the watches were counterfeit and admitts he intentionally was selling them. He contends that the statute requires that he act with knowledge that his conduct is criminal. He asserts he did not know trafficking in counterfeit goods is criminal and that he would not have done so had he known he was committing a crime.

D convicted for trafficking in counterfeit goods. This court rejects his contention and confirm conviction.

Should have the jury been charged that an element of the offense is knowledge of the criminality of the conduct?

A D may not be acquitted merely because he did not know that such conditions constituted defining elements of a proscribed offense.

The jury should not have been charged as D suggests. Innocence of the law is not an excuse.

A D cannot avoid prosecution by simply claiming that he had not brushed up on the law. The statute is clear that one must intentionally deal in goods and he must knowingly use a counterfeit mark in connection with these goods.