during the commission of a first degree assault. 5 Augustine’s fails to cite any relevant case law supporting the contention that a deadly weapon under 14 V.I.C. § 297(2) cannot include a firearm. 6 Augustine argues that the trial court erred in not defining “public place” to the jury. Augustine, however, failed to raise this issue at trial, and the trial court’s failure to define the term “public place” did not constitute plain error. See United States v. McCaleb, 552 F.3d 1053, 1059 (9th Cir. 2009) (“A [trial] court does not commit plain error by failing to define a word when it is a common word which an average juror can understand and which the average juror could have applied to the facts of [the] case without difficulty.”) (quotation marks and citation omitted); see also id. (<HOLDING>); United States v. Garza-Juarez, 992 F.2d 896,
holding trial court did not err by failing to consider amended petition filed after hearing without leave of court holding that the trial court did not err by granting defendants motion for summary judgment holding trial court did not err in failing to define manufacture holding that trial court did not err holding trial court did not err in failing to conduct a hearing on motion for reinstatement when appellants failed to call to the trial courts attention the need for a hearing