States v. Jinwright, 683 F.3d 471, 478 (4th Cir.2012). A court’s refusal to give a requested instruction is reversible error if the instruction “(1) was correct; (2) was not substantially covered by the court’s charge to the jury; and (3) dealt with some point in the trial so important, that failure to give the requested instruction seriously impaired the defendant’s ability to conduct his defense.” United States v. Lespier, 725 F.3d 437, 449 (4th Cir.2013) (internal quotation marks omitted), cert denied, — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 974, 187 L.Ed.2d 829 (2014). We conclude that the district court provided an adequate specific intent instruction to the jury, and thus was not required to give an additional instruction on good faith. See United States v. Fowler, 932 F.2d 306, 317 (4th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the
holding good faith jury instruction unnecessary when court gave adequate specific intent instruction holding that defendant charged with conspiracy to manufacture marijuana and possessing marijuana with intent to distribute was not entitled to specific buyerseller instruction even though support for such instruction existed because court gave a complete instruction reciting all the elements of conspiracy holding that a trial judge is obliged to give a correct jury instruction notwithstanding that request for instruction was technically erroneous if the evidence generates the subject matter of the jury instruction holding that when no objection was made to jury instruction evidence to support finding based on instruction should be assessed in light of the instruction given holding that a specific pretext instruction is not necessary