Standard Criminal Jury Charges

Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury: You have heard the evidence and the argument of counsel. It is now my duty to instruct you on the law in this case.

I will first instruct you on certain general points of law applicable to every criminal jury trial. I will then instruct you concerning the particular crime with which the accused is charged, as well as the lesser and responsive offenses included therein.

You must not single out any of these instructions and disregard others. The order in which the instructions are given does not indicate that one is more important than another.

Indictment not Evidence

The bill of information (indictment) filed in this case is not evidence of defendant’s guilt. It is merely the formal manner by which the state accuses a person of a crime in order to bring him/her to trial. The jury must not infer guilt of a defendant merely because a bill of information (indictment) has been filed.

Presumption of Innocence: Burden of Proof

A person accused of a crime is presumed by law to be innocent until each element of the crime, necessary to constitute guilt, is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The defendant is not required to prove that he is innocent. Thus, a defendant begins the trial with a clean slate.

The burden is upon the state to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In considering the evidence, you must give the defendant the benefit of every reasonable doubt arising out of the evidence or out of the lack of evidence. If you are not convinced of the guilt of the defendant beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find him/her not guilty.

Reasonable Doubt

While the state must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, it does not have to prove guilt beyond all possible doubt. Reasonable doubt is doubt based on reason and common sense and is present when, after you have carefully considered all of the evidence, you cannot say that you are firmly convinced of the truth of the charge.

Evidence: Direct and Circumstantial

There are two methods by which facts can be established: these are direct and circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence is evidence which, if believed, proves a fact at issue. Circumstantial or indirect evidence is evidence which, if believed, proves a fact, and from that fact you may logically and reasonably conclude that another, material fact exists. You cannot find a defendant guilty solely on circumstantial evidence unless the facts proven by the evidence exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.

Optional examples: I will give you an example of the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence. Assume it rained last night and evidence is being offered to prove that fact. 1) If a witness testifies that he saw, with his own eyes, rain falling last night, that is direct evidence. 2) If a witness testifies that before he went to sleep the ground was dry, but when he awoke he went outside and found the grass to be wet, the dirt now mud, and in the sky there was a rainbow, that would be circumstantial evidence that it rained last night. What this does, if believed, is prove exactly what the witness saw, and from the circumstances of that fact, one may logically conclude that another fact exists; that is, that it rained last night.

For the more poetic: Wo has seen the wind? Neither you nor I. But when the trees bow down their heads, the wind is passing by.

A jury may convict upon circumstantial evidence as well as upon direct evidence, if such evidence establishes the guilt of the accused, beyond a reasonable doubt.

Defendant's Right not to Testify

A defendant in a criminal case cannot be compelled to take the witness stand and testify. He has the absolute right not to testify. The jury must not draw a presumption of guilt or any inference against the defendant because he did not testify. The defendant need not prove innocence – he need not prove anything.

[Include only if defendant testifies] A defendant may, however, elect to take the witness stand and testify and, should he do so, you have no right to disregard his testimony merely because he is accused of a crime. When he does testify, he at once becomes the same as any other witness. His credibility is to be tested by and to be subjected to the same tests as are legally applied to the testimony of any other witness.

Duty of Jury Regarding Evidence

Although you are the sole judges of the law and the facts on the question of guilt or innocence, you have a duty to accept and apply the law as given by the court. You must decide the facts from the testimony and other evidence and apply the law to those facts in reaching your verdict. As jurors, you are not to be influenced by mere sympathy, passion, prejudice or public opinion.

You must determine whether or not a fact has been proven only from the evidence presented or from the lack of evidence. The evidence which you should consider consists of the testimony of witnesses [and of exhibits such as writings physical objects] which the court has permitted the parties to introduce.

You must consider only evidence which was admitted during the trial. You may not consider evidence which you were instructed to disregard or to which an objection was sustained.

As jurors you alone determine the weight and credibility of the evidence. As the sole judges of the credibility of witnesses and of the weight their testimony deserves, you should scrutinize carefully the testimony and the circumstances under which the witness has testified. In evaluating the testimony of a witness, you may consider ability and opportunity to observe and remember the matter, the manner while testifying, any reason for testifying in favor of or against the state or the defendant, and the extent to which the testimony is supported or contradicted by other evidence.

[If stipulation] A stipulation by and between the attorneys as to the existence of a fact must be accepted by you as evidence, and you must regard that fact as conclusively proved.

[If experts testify] The rules of evidence ordinarily do not permit witnesses to testify as to opinions or conclusions. An exception to this rule exists as to those whom we call “expert witnesses.” Witnesses who, by education and experience, have become expert in some art, science, profession, or calling, may state an opinion as to relevant matter in which they profess to be expert, and may also state their reasons for the opinion. You should consider each expert opinion received in this case, and give it such weight as you think it deserves. In this case you have heard the testimony of [physicians and of other] witnesses who have qualified as experts. If you should decide that the opinion of an expert witness is not based upon sufficient education and experience, or if you should conclude that the reasons given in support of the opinion are not sound, you may reject the opinion entirely.

[If inculpatory statement introduced] If the state offers evidence of a statement made by the defendant, you must first determine whether the statement was, in fact, made. You must also consider whether the statement, if made, was accurately recorded or repeated.

If you find that the defendant made a statement, you must also determine the weight or value that the statement should be accorded, if any. In determining the weight or value to be accorded a statement made by the defendant, you should consider all the circumstances under which the statement was made. In making that determination, you should consider whether the statement was made freely and voluntarily, without the influence of fear, duress, threats, intimidation, inducements or promises.

Responsive Verdicts: Form of Verdict

The defendant is charged with [name the offense in the indictment]. To convict the defendant of the offense charged, you must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the state proved every element of that offense.

Intent: One element of this offense is that the act or acts be done with (specific)(general) criminal intent.

Criminal intent may be specific or general. Specific criminal intent is that state of mind which exists when the circumstances indicate that the defendant actively desired the prescribed criminal consequences to follow his act or failure to act. General criminal intent is present when the circumstances indicate that the defendant must have adverted to the prescribed criminal consequences as reasonably certain to result from his act or failure to act. General criminal intent is always present when there is specific intent. Whether criminal intent is present must be determined in light of ordinary experience. Intent is a question of fact which may be inferred from the circumstances. You may infer that the defendant intended the natural and probable consequences of his acts.

If you are not convinced that the defendant is guilty of the offense charged; you may find the defendant guilty of a lesser offense, if you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of a lesser offense.

The following offenses are responsive lesser offenses: [Name and define the lesser offenses from the statutory language ].

Therefore the following verdicts may be returned:

[List the responsive verdicts. See C.Cr.P. 809, 814.]

i.e. Guilty as Charged

Guilty of ________________ [responsive offense]

Not Guilty

Thus, if you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the offense charged, your verdict should be guilty. If you are not convinced that the defendant is guilty of the offense charged, but you are convinced, beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of [first responsive verdict] the form of your verdict should be: Guilty of [first responsive verdict].

(Repeat above paragraph for second and subsequent responsive verdicts).

If the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of either the offense charged or of a lesser responsive offense, the form of your verdict should be Not Guilty.

[If insanity defense] If you find that the defendant established, by a preponderance of the evidence, the defense of insanity at the time of the offense, then your verdict should be: We the jury find the defendant “Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity.”

Deliberation Instructions
When you retire to the jury room, you will first select a foreman, either a man or woman, to preside over the deliberations. You must remain separate. If you have a question about the procedures, knock on the door and the bailiff will assist you. Similarly, if you need further instruction, write your question on a piece of paper and deliver it to the bailiff. Please be sure not to reveal your vote or your present thinking when you do so.

It is your duty to follow these instructions in reaching your verdict. As jurors, you are not to be influenced by mere sympathy, passion, prejudice, or public opinion. You are expected to reach a just verdict.

It is your duty to consult with one another and deliberate with a view to reaching an agreement, if you can do so without violence to individual judgment. You must each decide the case for yourself, but only after an impartial consideration of the evidence in the case, with your fellow jurors. In the course of your deliberations, do not hesitate to re-examine your own views, and change your opinion, if convinced it is erroneous. But do not surrender your honest conviction as to the weight or effect of evidence, solely because of the opinion of your fellow jurors, or for the mere purpose of returning a verdict.

Let me say that it is usually not a good idea for a juror, when first entering the jury room, to make an emphatic expression of opinion on the case or announce a determination to stand for a certain verdict. When one does that at the outset, a sense of pride may be at issue; one may hesitate to back down from an announced position, even if shown to be wrong. Remember, you are not advocates in this matter, but rather you are the judges. Your sole interest is to seek the truth from the evidence in the case.

Your verdict (must)(need not) be unanimous. When (all 12) (_____) of you agree upon the same verdict, whatever it may be, you may render it. Unless (all 12) (_____) of you agree on a verdict, no verdict can be returned. When you have agreed, your foreman shall write that verdict on the back of the list of verdicts, sign the verdict and complete the date.

When you have a verdict, notify the bailiff waiting outside your deliberation room. The bailiff will notify the court. Do not reveal your decision before it is announced in court.

EXCUSE ALTERNATE JURORS.

You may now retire. We will await your verdict.