Utah Courts

CR0 Criminal Introduction

The Advisory Committee on the Model Utah Criminal Jury Instructions has drafted instructions with the following principles in mind:

1. Plain Language - While the committee recognizes the reticence of practitioners and judges to depart from statutory language, the Committee has been charged with using plain language drafting principles so that statements of the law will be clear to non-lawyers. Therefore, the Committee has attempted to draft instructions using simple structure and words of ordinary meaning.
2. Template - Where possible, the Committee has used the pattern elements instruction found in CR 301 as a template for other instructions. This instruction shifts the language away from that used in older instructions to more appropriately maintain the presumption of innocence. The Committee strongly encourages practitioners and judges to apply this pattern in drafting elements instructions for other crimes.
3. Brackets and Parentheses - Brackets [ ] are placed around an element or language that is optional, or when more than one language option is available, e.g. [him][her]. Parentheses ( ) are used when information must be entered, e.g. (DEFENDANT'S NAME).
4. Use of Initials - The Committee has drafted the instructions so that only a victim's initials are used when the victim is a minor. If the victim is an adult, the Committee recommends that the victim's name be used unless the court makes a specific finding that use of the victim's name is inappropriate in a particular case.
5. Relevant Law - Jury instructions are current as of the date amended. Practitioners should check the date the offense occurred and review the law to determine what it was at the time of the offense.
6. Where an instruction title begins with the words "Practitioner's Note," those exist solely to assist practitioners and should not be provided to the jury.

Where available, the Committee urges practitioners to use jury instructions from the Second Edition of the Model Utah Jury Instructions to the exclusion of other instructions. When an approved instruction is not available, practitioners should focus on substance, as well as format, in drafting proposed instructions.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR100 Opening Instructions.

CR101 Introduction

(Ladies and Gentlemen) (Members of the Jury), you have been selected and sworn as the jury in this case. The defendant is accused of committing one or more crimes. You will decide if the defendant is guilty or not guilty. I will give you some instructions now and some later. You are required to consider and follow all my instructions. Keep an open mind throughout the trial. At the end of the trial you will discuss the evidence and reach a verdict. You took an oath to "well and truly try the issues pending between the parties" and to "render a true and just verdict." The oath is your promise to do your duty as a member of the jury. Be alert. Pay attention. Follow my instructions.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR102 Information, Plea and Burden of Proof.

The prosecution has filed a document-called an "Information"-that contains the charges against the defendant. The Information is not evidence of anything. It is only a method of accusing a defendant of a crime. The Information will now be read.

(Read Information)

The defendant has entered a plea of not guilty and denies committing the crime(s). Every crime has component parts called "elements." The prosecution must prove each element beyond a reasonable doubt. Until then, you must presume that the defendant is not guilty. The defendant does not have to prove anything. (He) (She) does not have to testify, call witnesses, or present evidence.

References

CR103 Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.

The prosecution has the burden of proving the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Some of you may have served as jurors in civil cases, where you were told that it is only necessary to prove that a fact is more likely true than not true. In criminal cases, the prosecution's proof must be more powerful than that. It must be beyond a reasonable doubt. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced of the defendant's guilt. There are very few things in this world that we know with absolute certainty, and in criminal cases the law does not require proof that overcomes every possible doubt. If, based on your consideration of the evidence, you are firmly convinced that the defendant is guilty of the crime charged, you must find (him) (her) guilty. If, on the other hand, you think there is a real possibility that (he) (she) is not guilty, you must give (him) (her) the benefit of the doubt and find (him) (her) not guilty.

References

Committee Notes

CR104 Presumption of Innocence.

Remember, the fact that the defendant is charged with a crime is not evidence of guilt. The law presumes that the defendant is not guilty of the crime(s) charged. This presumption persists unless the prosecution's evidence convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty.

References

CR105 Role of Judge, Jury and Lawyers.

All of us, judge, jury, and lawyers, are officers of the court and have different roles during the trial:

• As the judge, I will supervise the trial, decide legal issues, and instruct you on the law.
• As the jury, you must follow the law as you weigh the evidence and decide the factual issues. Factual issues relate to what did, or did not, happen in this case.
• The lawyers will present evidence and try to persuade you to decide the case in one way or the other.

Neither the lawyers nor I decide the case. That is your role. You are the exclusive judges of all questions of fact. Do not be influenced by what you think our opinions might be. Make your decision based on the law given in my instructions and on the evidence presented in court.

References

Committee Amended

CR106 Evidence.

As jurors you will decide whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty. You must base your decision only on the evidence. Evidence usually consists of the testimony and exhibits presented at trial. Testimony is what witnesses say under oath. Exhibits are things like documents, photographs, or other physical objects. The fact that the defendant has been accused of a crime and brought to trial is not evidence. What the lawyers say is not evidence. For example, their opening statements and closing arguments are not evidence.

References

CR107 Objections.

Rules govern what evidence may be presented to you. On the basis of these rules, the lawyers may object to proposed evidence. If they do, I will rule in one of two ways. If I sustain the objection, the proposed evidence will not be allowed. If I overrule the objection, the evidence will be allowed.

Do not evaluate the evidence on the basis of whether objections are made.

References

CR108 Order of the Trial.

I will now explain how the trial will unfold. The prosecution will give its opening statement. An opening statement gives an overview of the case from one point of view, and summarizes what that lawyer thinks the evidence will show. Defense counsel may choose to make an opening statement right after the prosecutor, or wait until after all of the prosecution's evidence has been presented, or not make one at all. You will then hear the prosecution's evidence. Evidence is usually presented by calling and questioning witnesses. What they say is called testimony. A witness is questioned first by the lawyer who called that witness and then by the opposing lawyer.

[For judges who permit juror questions, add: After the lawyers finish with their questions you will have the opportunity to submit questions. In a moment I will explain how to do this.]

Consider all testimony, whether from direct or cross-examination, regardless of who calls the witness. After the prosecution has presented all its evidence, the defendant may present evidence, though the defendant has no duty to do so. If the defendant does present evidence the prosecution may then present additional evidence. After both sides have presented all their evidence, I will give you final instructions on the law you must follow in reaching a verdict. You will then hear closing arguments from the lawyers. The prosecutor will speak first, followed by the defense counsel. Then the prosecutor speaks last, because the government has the burden of proof. Finally, you will deliberate in the jury room. You may take your notes with you. You will discuss the case and reach a verdict.

References

CR109 Conduct of Jurors.

From time to time I will call a recess. It may be for a few minutes or longer. During recesses, do not talk about this case with anyone-not family, not friends, not even each other. Until the trial is over, do not mingle or talk with the lawyers, parties, witnesses or anyone else connected with the case. Court clerks or bailiffs can answer general questions, such as the length of breaks or the location of restrooms. But they cannot comment about the case or anyone involved. The goal is to avoid the impression that anyone is trying to influence you improperly. If people involved in the case seem to ignore you outside of court, they are just following this instruction.

Until the trial is over, do not read or listen to any news reports about this case. If you observe anything that seems to violate this instruction, report it immediately to a clerk or bailiff.

References

CR109A Rules applicable to recesses.

From time to time I will call a recess. It may be for a few minutes or longer. During recesses, do not talk about this case with anyone-not family, not friends, not even each other. Until the trial is over, do not mingle or talk with the lawyers, parties, witnesses or anyone else connected with the case. Court clerks or bailiffs can answer general questions, such as the length of breaks or the location of restrooms. But they cannot comment about the case or anyone involved. The goal is to avoid the impression that anyone is trying to influence you improperly. If people involved in the case seem to ignore you outside of court, they are just following this instruction.

Until the trial is over, do not read or listen to any news reports about this case. Do not do any research or visit any locations related to this case. If you observe anything that seems to violate this instruction, report it immediately to a clerk or bailiff.

CR109B Further admonition about electronic devices.

Jurors have caused serious problems during trials by using electronic devices-such as phones, tablets, or computers-to research issues or share information about a case. You may be tempted to use these devices to investigate the case or to share your thoughts about the trial with others. Don't. While you are serving as a juror, you must not use electronic devices for these purposes, just as you must not read or listen to any sources outside the courtroom about the case or talk to others about it.

You violate your oath as a juror if you conduct your own investigation or if you communicate about this trial with others, and you may face serious personal consequences if you do. Let me be clear: do not "Google" the parties, witnesses, issues, or counsel; do not "Tweet" or text about the trial; do not use electronic devices to gather or send information on the case; do not post updates about the trial on Facebook pages; do not use Wikipedia or other internet information sources, etc. Even using something as seemingly innocent as "Google Maps" or a dictionary to look up terms can result in a mistrial.

Please understand that the rules of evidence and procedure have developed over hundreds of years in order to ensure the fair resolution of disputes. The fairness of the entire system depends on you reaching your decisions based on evidence presented to you in court and not on other sources of information.

Post-trial investigations can occur. If improper activities are discovered at any time, they will be brought to my attention and the entire case might have to be retried at substantial cost.

Committee Notes

CR110 Note-taking.

Feel free to take notes during the trial to help you remember the evidence, but do not let note-taking distract you. Your notes are not evidence and may be incomplete.

References

CR111 Juror Questions. [Optional for judges who permit questions.]

During the trial you may ask questions of the witnesses. However, to make sure the questions are legally appropriate, we will use the following procedure: After the lawyers have finished questioning each witness, I will ask if you have any questions. If you do, please do not ask the question out loud. Write it down and hand it to a bailiff. The bailiff will hand me your question. I will review it with the lawyers to make sure it is legally permissible. If the question is appropriate, it will be addressed. If not, I will tell you.

References

CR200 Closing Instructions.

CR201 Closing Roadmap.

Members of the jury, you now have all the evidence. Three things remain to be done:

First, I will give you additional instructions that you will follow in deciding this case.

Second, the lawyers will give their closing arguments. The prosecutor will go first, then the defense. Because the prosecution has the burden of proof, the prosecutor may give a rebuttal.

Finally, you will go to the jury room to discuss and decide the case.

References

CR202 Juror Duties.

You have two main duties as jurors.

The first is to decide from the evidence what the facts are. Deciding what the facts are is your job, not mine. You are the exclusive judges of all questions of fact.

The second duty is to take the law I give you in the instructions, apply it to the facts, and decide if the prosecution has proved the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

You are bound by your oath to follow the instructions that I give you, even if you personally disagree with them. This includes the instructions I gave you before trial, any instructions I may have given you during the trial, and these instructions. All the instructions are important, and you should consider them as a whole. The order in which the instructions are given does not mean that some instructions are more important than others. Whether any particular instruction applies may depend upon what you decide are the true facts of the case. If an instruction applies only to facts or circumstances you find do not exist, you may disregard that instruction.

Perform your duties fairly. Do not let any bias, sympathy or prejudice that you may feel toward one side or the other influence your decision in any way. [You must also not let yourselves be influenced by public opinion.]

References

Committee Amended

CR203 Closing Arguments.

When the lawyers give their closing arguments, keep in mind that they are advocating their views of the case. What they say during their closing arguments is not evidence. If the lawyers say anything about the evidence that conflicts with what you remember, you are to rely on your memory of the evidence. If they say anything about the law that conflicts with these instructions, you are to rely on these instructions.

References

CR204 Legal Rulings.

During the trial I have made certain rulings. I made those rulings based on the law, and not because I favor one side or the other.

However,

• if I sustained an objection,
• if I did not accept evidence offered by one side or the other, or
• if I ordered that certain testimony be stricken,

References

CR205 Judicial Neutrality.

As the judge, I am neutral. If I have said or done anything that makes you think I favor one side or the other, that was not my intention. Do not interpret anything I have done as indicating that I have any particular view of the evidence or the decision you should reach.

References

CR206 Evidence-Closing.

You must base your decision only on the evidence that you saw and heard here in court.

Evidence includes:

• what the witnesses said while they were testifying under oath; and
• any exhibits admitted into evidence.

References

Committee Notes

CR206A Items Not Admitted into Evidence.

Transcripts, police reports, or other written, audio, or visual materials may have been referenced during the trial but not admitted as exhibits. It is common during deliberations for jurors to ask to review these materials or to have transcripts of what witnesses said during trial. These materials, other than what may have been admitted as exhibits, may not be requested as part of your deliberations.

Committee Amended

CR207 Witness Credibility.

In deciding this case you will need to decide how believable each witness was. Use your judgment and common sense. Let me suggest a few things to think about as you weigh each witness's testimony:

• How good was the witness's opportunity to see, hear, or otherwise observe what the witness testified about?
• Does the witness have something to gain or lose from this case?
• Does the witness have any connection to the people involved in this case?
• Does the witness have any reason to lie or slant the testimony?
• Was the witness's testimony consistent over time? If not, is there a good reason for the inconsistency? If the witness was inconsistent, was it about something important or unimportant?
• How believable was the witness's testimony in light of other evidence presented at trial?
• How believable was the witness's testimony in light of human experience?
• Was there anything about the way the witness testified that made the testimony more or less believable?

References

CR208 Presumption of Innocence-Closing.

Remember, the fact that the defendant is charged with a crime is not evidence of guilt. The law presumes that the defendant is not guilty of the crime(s) charged. This presumption persists unless the prosecution's evidence convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty.

References

CR209 Reasonable Doubt-Closing.

[As I instructed you before] Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced of the defendant's guilt. There are very few things in this world that we know with absolute certainty, and in criminal cases the law does not require proof that overcomes every possible doubt. If the evidence leaves you firmly convinced that the defendant is guilty of the crime charged, you must find the defendant "guilty." On the other hand, if there is a real possibility that (he) (she) is not guilty, you must give the defendant the benefit of the doubt and return a verdict of "not guilty."

References

Committee Notes

CR210 Direct/Circumstantial Evidence.

Facts may be proved by direct or circumstantial evidence. The law does not treat one type of evidence as better than the other.

Direct evidence can prove a fact by itself. It usually comes from a witness who perceived firsthand the fact in question. For example, if a witness testified he looked outside and saw it was raining, that would be direct evidence that it had rained.

Circumstantial evidence is indirect evidence. It usually comes from a witness who perceived a set of related events, but not the fact in question. However, based on that testimony someone could conclude that the fact in question had occurred. For example, if a witness testified that she looked outside and saw that the ground was wet and people were closing their umbrellas, that would be circumstantial evidence that it had rained.

Before you can find the defendant guilty of any charge, there must be enough evidence-direct, circumstantial, or some of both-to convince you of the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It is up to you to decide.

References

CR211A Defendant Testifying.

The defendant testified at trial. Another instruction mentions some things for you to think about in weighing testimony. Consider those same things in weighing the defendant's testimony. Don't reject the defendant's testimony merely because he or she is accused of a crime.

References

CR211B Defendant Not Testifying.

A person accused of a crime may choose whether or not to testify. In this case the defendant chose not to testify. Do not hold that choice against the defendant. Do not try to guess why the defendant chose not to testify. Do not consider it in your deliberations. Decide the case only on the basis of the evidence. The defendant does not have to prove that he or she is not guilty. The prosecution must prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

References

CR212 Offense Requires Conduct and Mental State.

A person cannot be found guilty of a criminal offense unless that person's conduct is prohibited by law, AND at the time the conduct occurred, the defendant demonstrated a particular mental state specified by law.

"Conduct" can mean both an "act" or the failure to act when the law requires a person to act. An "act" is a voluntary movement of the body and it can include speech.

As to the "mental state" requirement, the prosecution must prove that at the time the defendant acted (or failed to act), (he) (she) did so with a particular mental state. For each offense, the law defines what kind of mental state the defendant had to have, if any. For some crimes the defendant must have acted "intentionally" or "knowingly." For other crimes it is enough that the defendant acted "recklessly," with "criminal negligence," or with some other specified mental state.

Later I will instruct you on the specific conduct and mental state that the prosecution must prove before the defendant can be found guilty of the crime(s) charged.

References

Committee Notes

CR213 Inferring the Required Mental State.

The law requires that the prosecutor prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted with a particular mental state.

Ordinarily, there is no way that a defendant's mental state can be proved directly, because no one can tell what another person is thinking.

A defendant's mental state can be proved indirectly from the surrounding facts and circumstances. This includes things like what the defendant said, what the defendant did, and any other evidence that shows what was in the defendant's mind.

References

CR214 Motive.

A defendant's "mental state" is not the same as "motive." Motive is why a person does something. Motive is not an element of the crime(s) charged in this case. As a result, the prosecutor does not have to prove why the defendant acted (or failed to act).

However, a motive or lack of motive may help you determine if the defendant did what (he) (she) is charged with doing. It may also help you determine what (his) (her) mental state was at the time.

References

Committee Notes

CR215 Do Not Consider Punishment.

In making your decision, do not consider what punishment could result from a verdict of guilty. Your duty is to decide if the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Punishment is not relevant to whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty.

References

CR216 Jury Unanimity and Deliberations.

Because this is a criminal case, every single juror must agree with the verdict before the defendant can be found "guilty" or "not guilty." That is, you must be unanimous in your verdict for each count charged.

To help you in reaching unanimous agreement, I recommend that you not commit yourselves to a particular verdict before discussing all the evidence. In addition, you may not use methods of chance, such as drawing straws or flipping a coin.

Rather, in the jury room, consider the evidence and speak your minds with each other. Listen carefully and respectfully to each other's views and keep an open mind about what others have to say. If there is a difference of opinion about the evidence or the verdict, do not hesitate to change your mind if you become convinced that your position is wrong. On the other hand, do not give up your honestly held views about the evidence simply to agree on a verdict, to give in to pressure from other jurors, or just to get the case over with.

In the end, your vote must be your own. A unanimous verdict must reflect the individual, careful, and conscientious judgment of each juror as to whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR217 Foreperson Selection and Duties.

Among the first things you should do when you go to the jury room to deliberate is to appoint someone to serve as the jury foreperson. The foreperson should not dominate the jury's discussion, but rather should facilitate the discussion of the evidence and make sure that all members of the jury get the chance to speak. The foreperson's opinions should be given the same weight as those of other members of the jury. Once the jury has reached a verdict, the foreperson is responsible for filling out and signing the verdict form(s) on behalf of the entire jury.

For each offense, the verdict form will have two blanks-one for "guilty" and the other for "not guilty." The foreperson will fill in the appropriate blank to reflect the jury's unanimous decision. In filling out the form, the foreperson needs to make sure that only one blank is marked for each charge.

CR217A Jury Questions During Deliberations.

These instructions should contain all the information you need to decide this case based upon the evidence. However, if you have a question or need clarification during deliberations, write a note and give it to the bailiff. I will review it with the lawyers. We will answer your question as appropriate.

Committee Amended

CR218 Deadlocked Juries.

The verdict must represent the considered judgment of each juror. In order to return a verdict, it is necessary that each juror agree. Your verdict must be unanimous.

It is your duty to consult with one another and to deliberate. Your goal should be to reach an agreement if you can do so without surrendering your individual judgment. Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but do so only after impartially considering the evidence with your fellow jurors. Do not hesitate to reexamine your own views and change your position if you are convinced it is mistaken. But do not surrender your honest conviction as to the weight or effect of the evidence solely because of the opinion of your fellow jurors, or just to return a verdict.

You are judges -- judges of the facts. Your sole interest is to determine the truth from the evidence in the case.

References

Committee Notes

CR219 Special Verdict Form.

If you determine beyond a reasonable doubt that (DEFENDANT'S NAME) committed (NAME OF RELEVANT OFFENSE), you must complete the special verdict form. Check the box on the form for each factor that you as the jury unanimously find the prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Do not check the box for any factor the prosecution has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

Even if you do not check any boxes, the foreperson must sign the special verdict form.

References

Committee Notes

CR300 Elements and Definitions.

CR301 Elements.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ____] with committing (CRIME) [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. ELEMENT ONE...;
3. ELEMENT TWO...;
4. [That the defense of _____________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR302A Intentional as to Conduct or as to Result.

A person acts ["intentionally"] ["willfully"] ["with intent"] when [his][her] conscious objective is to:

1. engage in certain conduct; or
2. cause a certain result.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR302B Intentional as to the Result.

A person acts ["intentionally"] ["willfully"] ["with intent"] when [his][her] conscious objective is to cause a certain result.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR302C Intentional as to Conduct.

A person acts ["intentionally"] ["willfully"] ["with intent"] when [his][her] conscious objective is to engage in certain conduct.

"Conduct means either an act or an omission.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR303A Knowledge as to Conduct or as to Result.

A person acts ["knowingly"] ["with knowledge"] when the person:

1. is aware of the nature of [his][her] conduct; or
2. is aware of the particular circumstances surrounding [his] [her] conduct; or
3. is aware that [his] [her] conduct is reasonably certain to cause a particular result.

"Conduct" means either an act or an omission.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR303B Knowledge as to Result.

A person acts ["knowingly"] ["with knowledge"] when the person is aware that [his] [her] conduct is reasonably certain to cause a particular result.

"Conduct" means either an act or an omission.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR303C Knowledge as to Conduct or Circumstances Surrounding Conduct.

A person acts ["knowingly"] ["with knowledge"] when the person is aware of the nature of [his] [her] conduct, or is aware of the particular circumstances surrounding [his][her] conduct.

"Conduct" means either an act or an omission.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR304A Reckless as to Circumstances Surrounding Conduct or as to Result.

A person acts "recklessly" when [he][she] is aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that:

1. certain circumstances exist relating to [his] [her] conduct, but [he] [she] consciously disregards the risk and acts anyway; or
2. [his] [her] conduct will cause a particular result, but [he] [she] consciously disregards the risk and acts anyway.

The nature and extent of the risk must be of such a magnitude that disregarding it is a gross deviation from what an ordinary person would do in that situation.

"Conduct" means either an act or an omission.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR304B Reckless as to Result.

A person acts "recklessly" when [he][she] is aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that [his] [her] conduct will cause a particular result, but [he] [she] consciously disregards the risk and acts anyway.

The nature and extent of the risk must be of such a magnitude that disregarding it is a gross deviation from what an ordinary person would do in that situation.

"Conduct" means either an act or an omission.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR304C Reckless as to Circumstances Surrounding Conduct.

A person acts "recklessly" when [he] [she] is aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that certain circumstances exist relating to [his] [her] conduct, but [he] [she] consciously disregards the risk and acts anyway.

The nature and extent of the risk must be of such a magnitude that disregarding it is a gross deviation from what an ordinary person would do in that situation.

"Conduct" means either an act or an omission.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR305 Simple Negligence.

Simple negligence means failing to exercise that degree of care which reasonable and prudent persons exercise under like or similar circumstances.

References

Committee Notes

CR306A Criminal Negligence as to Result of Conduct.

A person acts with criminal negligence when (he)(she) should be aware that (his)(her) conduct creates a substantial and unjustifiable risk that a particular result will occur.

The nature and extent of the risk must be of such a magnitude that failing to perceive it is a gross deviation from what an ordinary person would perceive in that situation.

"Conduct" means either an act or an omission.

References

Committee Notes

CR306B Criminal Negligence as to Circumstances Surrounding Conduct.

A person acts with criminal negligence when (he)(she) should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that certain circumstances exist relating to (his)(her) conduct.

The nature and extent of the risk must be of such a magnitude that failing to perceive it is a gross deviation from what an ordinary person would perceive in that situation.

"Conduct" means either an act or an omission.

References

Committee Notes

CR307 Comparing Recklessness with Criminal Negligence.

The concepts of "recklessness" and "criminal negligence" are similar in that both require the presence of a substantial and unjustifiable risk. They differ in that it is reckless to act if one is aware of the risk, while it is criminally negligent to act if one should be aware of the risk. In either event, the behavior must be a gross deviation from what an ordinary person would do under the same circumstances.

References

CR308 Usual and Ordinary Meanings Instruction.

Unless these instructions give a definition, you should give all words their usual and ordinary meanings.

CR401 Fact Versus Expert Witnesses.

There are two types of witnesses: fact witnesses and expert witnesses. Usually a fact witness can testify only about facts that (he) (she) can see, hear, touch, taste or smell. An expert witness has scientific, technical or other special knowledge that allows the witness to give an opinion. An expert's knowledge can come from training, education, experience or skill. Experts can testify about facts, and they can give their opinions in their area of expertise.

You may have to weigh one expert's opinion against another's. In weighing the opinions of experts, you may look at their qualifications, the reasoning process the experts used, and the overall credibility of their testimony. You may also look at things like bias, consistency, and reputation.

Use your common sense in evaluating all witnesses, including expert witnesses. You do not have to accept an expert's opinion. You may accept it all, reject it all, or accept part and reject part. Give it whatever weight you think it deserves.

References

CR402 Separate Consideration of Multiple Crimes.

The defendant has been charged with more than one crime. It is your duty to consider each charge separately. For each crime charged, consider all of the evidence related to that charge. Decide whether the prosecution has presented proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of that particular crime. Your verdict on one charge does not determine your verdict on any other charge.

References

CR403A Party Liability - Elements.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged as a party to the offense [in Count_____] with committing (CRIME) [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME), as a party to the offense;
2. [Insert element two of (CRIME)];
3. [Insert element three of (CRIME)];
4. Etc.

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that one or more of these elements has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR403B Party Liability - Definition.

A person can commit a crime as a "party to the offense." In other words, a person can commit a criminal offense even though he or she did not personally do all of the acts that make up the offense. Before a person may be found guilty as a "party to the offense," you must find beyond a reasonable doubt that:

1. The person had the mental state required to commit the charged offense;

AND


2. The person:
1. directly committed the charged offense; or
2. intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly solicited, requested, commanded or encouraged another person to commit the charged offense; or
3. intentionally aided another person to commit the charged offense;

AND


3. The charged offense was committed either by that person or another person.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR404 Eyewitnesses Identification [Long instruction].

An important question in this case is the identification of the defendant as the person who committed the crime. The prosecution has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime was committed AND that the defendant was the person who committed the crime. If you are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is the person who committed the crime, you must find the defendant not guilty.

The testimony you have heard concerning identification represents the witness's expression of (his) (her) belief or impression. You don't have to believe that the identification witness was lying or not sincere to find the defendant not guilty. It is enough that you conclude that the witness was mistaken in (his) (her) belief or impression.

Many factors affect the accuracy of identification. In considering whether the prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is the person who committed the crime, you should consider the following:

(1) Did the witness have an adequate opportunity to observe the person who committed the crime? In answering this question, you should consider:

(a) the length of time the witness observed that person;
(b) the distance between the witness and that person;
(c) the extent to which that person's features were visible and undisguised;
(d) the lighting conditions at the time of observation;
(e) whether there were any distractions occurring during the observation;
(f) any other circumstance that affected the witness's opportunity to observe the person committing the crime.

(a) stress or fright at the time of observation;
(b) personal motivations, biases or prejudices;
(c) uncorrected visual defects;
(d) fatigue or injury;
(e) drugs or alcohol.

(a) the length of time that passed between the witness's original observation and the time the witness identified the defendant;
(b) the witness's mental capacity and state of mind at the time of the identification;
(c) the exposure of the witness to opinions, to photographs, or to any other information or influence that may have affected the independence of the identification of the defendant by the witness;
[(d) any instances when the witness either identified or failed to identify the defendant;]
[(e) any instances when the witness gave a description of the person that was either consistent or inconsistent with the defendant's appearance;]
(f) the circumstances under which the defendant was presented to the witness for identification.

References

Committee Notes

CR405 Flight from Scene.

Evidence was introduced at trial that the defendant may have fled or attempted to flee from the crime scene. This evidence alone is not enough to establish guilt. However, if you believe that evidence, you may consider it along with the rest of the evidence in reaching a verdict. It's up to you to decide how much weight to give that evidence.

Keep in mind that there may be reasons for flight that could be fully consistent with innocence. Even if you choose to infer from the evidence that the defendant had a "guilty conscience," that does not necessarily mean (he) (she) is guilty of the crime charged.

References

CR406 Flight after Accusation.

Evidence was introduced at trial that the defendant may have fled or attempted to flee after having been accused of the crime. This evidence alone is not enough to establish guilt. However, if you believe that evidence, you may consider it along with the rest of the evidence in reaching a verdict. It's up to you to decide how much weight to give that evidence.

Keep in mind that there may be reasons for flight that could be fully consistent with innocence. Even if you choose to infer from the evidence that the defendant had a "guilty conscience," that does not necessarily mean (he) (she) is guilty of the crime charged.

References

CR407 Law Enforcement Officer's Testimony.

You have heard the testimony of a law enforcement officer. The fact that a witness is employed in law enforcement does not mean that (his) (her) testimony deserves more or less consideration than that of any other witness. It is up to you to give any witness's testimony whatever weight you think it deserves.

References

CR408 Age of Witness.

You have heard the testimony of a young witness. No witness is disqualified just because of age. There is no precise age that determines whether a witness may testify. The critical consideration is not the witness's age, but whether the witness understands the difference between what is true and what is not true, and understands the duty to tell the truth.

References

CR409 609-Impeaching Defendant Testimony by Prior Conviction.

Evidence has been presented that the defendant was previously convicted of a crime. This evidence was brought to your attention only to help you evaluate the credibility of the defendant as a witness. Do not use it for any other purpose. It is not evidence that the defendant is guilty of the crime(s) for which (he) (she) is now on trial.

References

Committee Notes

CR410 609-Impeaching Witness Testimony by Prior Conviction.

Evidence has been presented that a witness was previously convicted of a crime. This evidence was brought to your attention only to help you evaluate the credibility of that witness. Do not use it for any other purpose. It is not evidence of anything else.

References

Committee Notes

CR411 404(b) Instruction.

You (are about to hear) (have heard) evidence that the defendant [insert 404(b) evidence] (before) (after) the act(s) charged in this case. This evidence (is) (was) not admitted to prove a character trait of the defendant or to show that (he) (she) acted in a manner consistent with that trait. You may consider this evidence, if at all, for the limited purpose of [practitioners must specify proper non-character purpose such as motive, intent, etc. and to which issue(s) it applies]. Keep in mind that the defendant is on trial for the crime(s) charged in this case, and for (that) (those) crime(s) only. You may not convict the defendant simply because you believe (he) (she) may have committed some other act(s) at another time.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR412 Stipulation of Fact.

When lawyers agree that certain facts are true it is called a "stipulation of fact." You must accept any stipulated facts as having been proven. However, the significance of these facts, as with all facts, is for you to decide.

CR413 Stipulation of Expected Testimony.

Lawyers may also agree that a witness, if called, would offer certain testimony. That is called a "stipulation of expected testimony." Although you must accept that the witness would give this testimony, you do not have to accept that testimony as true. You may consider it and give it whatever weight it deserves.

CR414A Multiple Defendants - Missing Defendant(s).

There has been evidence suggesting that [a person] [persons] other than the defendant may have been involved in the crime for which the defendant is on trial. Your duty in this case is to decide only whether the prosecutor has proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, the guilt of the defendant who is on trial.

References

Committee Notes

CR414B Multiple Defendants - Joint Trial.

There is more than one defendant on trial. If evidence was admitted only as to one defendant, you may consider it in connection with that defendant only. You must consider the charges against each defendant separately.

References

CR415 In-Custody Informant.

You have heard from a witness who may be classified as an "in-custody informant." The law allows the use of such testimony. However, the testimony of an informant who provides evidence against a defendant must be examined and weighed by you with greater care than the testimony of an ordinary witness. Whether the informant's testimony has been affected by interest or prejudice against the defendant is for you to determine. In making that determination, you should consider:

1. Whether the informant has received anything (including leniency in prosecution, personal advantage, or vindication) in exchange for testimony;
2. Other cases, and the number of other cases, in which the informant testified or offered statements against another, whether those statements are being used, and whether the informant received any deal, promise, inducement, or benefit in exchange for that testimony or statement, or believed he was likely to receive some benefit from his cooperation;
3. Whether the informant has ever changed his or her testimony;
4. The criminal history of the informant, not just limited to number of convictions, but also the level of sophistication gained through the informant's experience in the criminal justice system; and
5. Any other evidence related to the informant's credibility.

In sum, you should look at all of the evidence in deciding what credence and what weight, if any, you would give to the jailhouse informant.

You should bear in mind that a witness who has entered into such an agreement with the government may have an interest in the case different than any ordinary witness. A witness who believes that he may be able to obtain his own freedom, or receive a lighter sentence by giving testimony favorable to the prosecution, has motive to testify falsely. Therefore, you must examine [his] [her] testimony with caution and weigh it with great care. If, after scrutinizing [his] [her] testimony, you decide to accept it, you may give it whatever weight, if any, you find it deserves.

References

CR416 Adverse inference for law enforcement failure to comply with activation or use of body-worn camera.

Evidence was introduced at trial that [Officer Name] may have intentionally or recklessly disregarded the requirement that

[an officer shall activate the body-worn camera prior to any law enforcement encounter, or as soon as reasonably possible]

[an officer shall record in an uninterrupted manner until after the conclusion of a law enforcement encounter, and there was not an exception allowed by law]

[an officer may not deactivate the body-worn camera until the officer's direct participation in the law enforcement encounter is complete]

[any other requirement].

Based upon that evidence, you may make an inference against the officer. It is up to you to decide how much weight to give that evidence.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR430 Jury Unanimity - Single Offense in More Than One Way.

Count (#) charges (DEFENDANT'S NAME) with (CRIME). Evidence was introduced that the defendant may have committed the offense by [WAY 1][WAY 2][WAY 3].

You may not find (DEFENDANT'S NAME) guilty on this count unless you unanimously agree that the prosecution has proven that (DEFENDANT'S NAME) committed (CRIME) in at least one of those specific ways AND you unanimously agree on the specific way in which the defendant committed the offense.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR431 Jury Unanimity - Multiple Offenses with Identical Elements.

The prosecution has charged in Count (#) through Count (#) that (DEFENDANT'S NAME) committed (CRIME) multiple times. Although each of these counts has similar or identical elements, you must consider each count separately and reach unanimous agreement on whether (DEFENDANT'S NAME) is guilty or not guilty of each individual count. You may not find the defendant guilty of any count unless you unanimously agree the prosecution has proven the specific act in the elements of the offense for each count AND you unanimously agree the prosecution has proven all other elements of the count. You may find the defendant guilty of all of these counts, none of these counts, or only some of these counts; but for each count your decision must be unanimous.

In this case:

• Count (#) is based on the alleged conduct of (INSERT SPECIFIC CONDUCT AND OCCASION).
• Count (#) is based on the alleged conduct of (INSERT SPECIFIC CONDUCT AND OCCASION).
• [Count (#) is based on the alleged conduct of (INSERT SPECIFIC CONDUCT AND OCCASION).]

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR432 Jury Unanimity - Evidence of More Occurrences than Charges.

The prosecution has charged in Count (#) through Count (#) that (DEFENDANT'S NAME) committed (CRIME). Evidence was introduced that (DEFENDANT'S NAME) may have committed (CRIME) more times than the number of charged counts. When determining whether (DEFENDANT'S NAME) committed (CRIME), you must be unanimous as to which occasion and which act (DEFENDANT'S NAME) committed for each count, and that the prosecution has proven all the elements for that count. You may find (DEFENDANT'S NAME) guilty of all these counts, none of these counts, or only some of these counts; but for each count your decision must be unanimous.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR440 Entrapment.

You must decide whether the defense of entrapment applies in this case. Under that defense, the defendant is not guilty of an offense if (he)(she) acted because (he)(she) was entrapped into committing the offense. A defendant carries no burden to prove the defense of entrapment. In other words, the defendant is not required to prove the defense of entrapment applies to (his)(her) conduct. Rather, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that entrapment does not apply.

Entrapment occurs when, in order to obtain evidence, a peace officer [or a person directed by or acting in cooperation with the peace officer] induces a person to commit an offense by methods that create a substantial risk that the offense would be committed by one not otherwise ready to commit it. Conduct merely affording a person an opportunity to commit an offense does not constitute entrapment.

Many circumstances may affect the defense of entrapment. In considering whether the prosecution has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that entrapment does not apply, you should consider the following:

• the defendant's reactions to the peace officer's [or peace officer's agent's] inducement, including:
  • whether the defendant hesitated when presented with an illegal opportunity and succumbed only to persistent pressure; or
  • whether the defendant actively pursued the commission of the crime despite opportunities to withdraw;


• whether the case involves:
  • improper police conduct where the peace officer [or peace officer's agent] applied persistent pressure or persistently pursued the defendant to commit the offense;
  • appeals based on sympathy, pity, close personal friendships, or offers of inordinate sums of money; and


• any other circumstances you find helpful in evaluating whether the defendant freely and voluntarily committed the offense.

Keep in mind that not all the listed circumstances will apply in every case, and some cases might have circumstances that are not listed here.

[The defense of entrapment is unavailable when an element of the offense is causing or threatening bodily injury to a person other than a peace officer [or the person directed by or acting in cooperation with the peace officer].]

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR444 Pro se Defendant

The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees that a person charged with a crime has the right to the assistance of counsel. This Constitutional guarantee also provides that an individual charged with a crime has the right to proceed to trial representing himself/herself. In this case the defendant will be representing himself/herself. You are not to let the fact that (DEFENDANT'S NAME) is representing himself/herself influence your decision in this case. Instead, you must decide this case based upon the law in the court's instructions and the evidence received during the course of the trial. When (DEFENDANT'S NAME) is acting as a lawyer in the case, [his] [her] words are not evidence. The rules that govern courtroom proceedings apply equally to both parties in this circumstance.

[(STANDBY COUNSEL'S NAME) has been appointed as standby counsel to the defendant but not to act as his/her attorney. In electing to represent himself/herself, the defendant has assumed the full responsibility of acting as his/her own attorney.]

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR501 Practitioner's Note: Preamble to the Affirmative Defense Instructions.

As a general rule, if the evidence supports an affirmative defense, the State "has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt" that the defense does not apply. State v. Knoll, 712 P.2d 211, 214-15 (Utah 1985). See also State v. Low, 2008 UT 58, para.45, 192 P.3d 867 (stating that murder instruction was in error "because it lacked the necessary element that the State show the absence of the affirmative defense[]."); State v. Swenson, 838 P.2d 1136, 1138 (Utah 1992) (stating that "a long line of Utah cases imposes on the prosecution the burden to disprove the existence of affirmative defenses beyond a reasonable doubt.") There are some exceptions to the general rule. The following list provides examples of statutes which allocate the burden of proof to the defendant, who must prove the affirmative defense by a preponderance of the evidence:

Utah Code Ann. § 58-37c-19.7(3)(c), Drug precursor statute (re: red phosphorus)

Utah Code Ann. § 58-37c-20(3)(c), Drug precursor statute (re: pseudoephedrine)

Utah Code Ann. § 58-37-8(12)(d), Ceremonial use of peyote by Native Americans statute

Utah Code Ann. § 19-5-115(5)(e), Environmental code violations

Although not specifically characterized as an affirmative defense, there is a provision in Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-401(3), Unlawful Sexual Activity with a Minor, which operates similarly. If a defendant establishes by a preponderance of the evidence that he was less than 4 years older than the minor, it reduces the offense from a third degree felony to a class B misdemeanor.

CR502 Compulsion Instruction.

You must decide whether the defense of compulsion applies in this case. Under that defense, a person is not guilty of a crime if (he) (she) acted because (he) (she) was coerced to do so by

The use or threatened use of force must be such that a person of reasonable firmness in defendant's situation would not have resisted.

The defense of compulsion is not available if the defendant intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly placed (himself) (herself) in a situation where it was probable that (he) (she) would be subjected to duress.

The defendant is not required to prove the defense applies. Rather, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defense does not apply. The State has the burden of proof at all times. If the State has not carried this burden, then you must find the defendant not guilty.

Committee Notes

CR503 Intoxication Instruction.

The defendant has been charged with ___________________. The charge requires the prosecution to prove that the defendant acted [intentionally] [knowingly] [intentionally [and] [or] knowingly]. You must decide whether the defense of intoxication applies to this charge. Intoxication (due to the consumption of drugs or alcohol) is a defense if there is reasonable doubt that the defendant acted intentionally or knowingly because (he) (she) was intoxicated.

The defendant does not have to prove that the defense of intoxication applies. Rather, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that intoxication did not prevent the defendant from acting [intentionally] [knowingly] [intentionally [and] [or] knowingly]. The prosecution carries the burden of proof. If the prosecution has not carried this burden, then you must find the defendant not guilty.

Committee Notes

CR504 Voluntary Termination Instruction.

You must decide whether the defense of voluntary termination applies in this case. The defendant is not guilty of [OFFENSE] if, before the crime was committed, (he) (she) voluntarily ended (his) (her) conduct in furtherance of the crime, and (he) (she)

This defense may apply even if the crime is completed by others.

The defendant is not required to prove that the defense of voluntary termination applies. Rather, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defense does not apply. The prosecution carries the burden of proof at all times. If the prosecution has not carried this burden, then you must find the defendant not guilty.

CR505 Road map with lesser included offenses.

Count [#] charges the defendant with [_______]. [Lesser offense] is a lesser included offense of that charge. As you deliberate, you must determine whether the defendant is guilty of [the charged offense], guilty of [the lesser offense], or not guilty of either offense. The law does not require you to make these determinations in any particular order. However, you cannot find the defendant guilty of both [the charged offense] and [the lesser offense]. In other words, you can only return one verdict on count [#]: guilty of [the charged offense], guilty of [the lesser offense], or not guilty of either offense.

     The elements for [the charged offense] are set forth in Instruction [#].

     The elements for [the lesser offense] are set forth in Instruction [#].

Committee Notes

CR510 Defense of Habitation, Self or Others, Property - Reasonableness.

Reasonableness shall be determined from the viewpoint of a reasonable person under the then-existing circumstances.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR520 Definition of Habitation.

The defense of Defense of Habitation is not limited to a habitation the defendant owns. The defense may apply to whatever place the defendant may be occupying peacefully as a substitute home or habitation, including but not limited to a hotel, motel, or where the defendant is a guest in another person's home.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR521 Defense of Habitation.

You must decide whether the defense of Defense of Habitation applies in this case.

Under that defense, the defendant is justified in using force against another when and to the extent the defendant reasonably believes that force is necessary to:

1. Prevent the other person's unlawful entry into the habitation; or
2. Terminate the other person's unlawful entry into the habitation; or
3. Prevent the other person's attack upon the habitation; or
4. Terminate the other person's attack upon the habitation.

The defendant is justified in the use of force which is intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury only if:

1. The other person's entry is made or attempted in a violent and tumultuous manner, surreptitiously, or by stealth, and the defendant reasonably believes:
1. that the other person's entry is attempted or made for the purpose of assaulting or threatening personal violence to any person, dwelling, or being in the habitation; and
2. that the force is necessary to prevent an assault or threat of personal violence;

OR


2. The defendant reasonably believes:
1. that the other person's entry is made or attempted for the purpose of committing a felony in the habitation; and
2. that the force is necessary to prevent the commission of the felony.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR522 Defense of Habitation - Presumption.

The person using force or deadly force in defense of habitation is presumed to have acted reasonably and had a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or serious bodily injury if the entry or attempted entry:

1. is unlawful; and
2. is made or attempted:
1. by use of force or in a violent and tumultuous manner; or
2. surreptitiously or by stealth; or
3. for the purpose of committing a felony.

The prosecution may defeat the presumption by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the entry was 1) lawful or 2) not made or attempted by use of force, or in a violent and tumultuous manner; or surreptitiously or by stealth; or for the purpose of committing a felony. The prosecution may also rebut the presumption by proving beyond a reasonable doubt that in fact the defendant's beliefs and actions were not reasonable.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR523 Defense of Habitation - Prosecutor's Burden.

The defendant carries no burden to prove the defense of Defense of Habitation. In other words, the defendant is not required to prove [he/she] was justified in using force or force likely to cause death or serious bodily injury. Rather, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not justified in using force or force likely to cause death or serious bodily injury. The prosecution carries the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If the prosecution has not carried this burden, then you must find the defendant not guilty.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR530 Defense of Self or Other.

You must decide whether the defense of Defense of Self or Other applies in this case. Under that defense, the defendant is justified in using force against another person when and to the extent that the defendant reasonably believes that force is necessary to defend [himself] [herself], or a third party, against another person's imminent use of unlawful force.

The defendant is justified in using force intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injury only if the defendant reasonably believes that:

1. Force is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury to the defendant or a third person as a result of another person's imminent use of unlawful force; or
2. To prevent the commission of [Forcible Felony], the elements of which can be found under jury instruction [__________].

The defendant is not justified in using force if the defendant:

1. Initially provokes the use of force against another person with the intent to use force as an excuse to inflict bodily harm upon the assailant;
2. Is attempting to commit, committing, or fleeing after the commission or attempted commission of [Felony], the elements of which can be found under jury instruction [__________]; or
3. Was the aggressor or was engaged in a combat by agreement, unless the defendant withdraws from the encounter and effectively communicates to the other person the defendant's intent to do so and, notwithstanding, the other person continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful force.

The following do not, by themselves, constitute "combat by agreement":

1. Voluntarily entering into or remaining in an ongoing relationship; or
2. Entering or remaining in a place where one has a legal right to be.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR531 Defense of Self or Other - Imminence.

In determining imminence or reasonableness you may consider any of the following factors:

1. the nature of the danger;
2. the immediacy of the danger;
3. the probability that the unlawful force would result in death or serious bodily injury;
4. the other's prior violent acts or violent propensities;
5. any patterns of abuse or violence in the parties' relationship; or
6. any other relevant factor.

References

Committee Amended

CR532 Defense of Self or Other - Prosecution's Burden.

A defendant carries no burden to prove the defense of Defense of Self or Others. In other words, a defendant is not required to prove [he/she] was justified in using [force] [or] [force likely to cause death or serious bodily injury]. Rather, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not justified in using [force] [or] [force likely to cause death or serious bodily injury]. If the prosecution has not met this burden, then you must find the defendant not guilty.

References

Committee Amended

CR533 Defense of Self or Other - No Duty to Retreat.

A defendant does not have a duty to retreat from another person's use or threatened use of unlawful force before using force to defend [himself/herself] or a third party as long as the defendant is in a place where [he/she] has lawfully entered or remained.

However, if the defendant was the aggressor or was engaged in combat by agreement, the defendant must withdraw from the encounter and effectively communicate to the other person [his/her] intent to do so. If the other person nevertheless continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful force, the defendant no longer has the duty to retreat.

References

Committee Amended

CR540 Use of Force in Defense of Property.

A defendant is justified in using force, other than deadly force, against another person to defend real or personal property when and to the extent [he][she] reasonably believes the force is necessary to prevent or terminate the other person's criminal interference with real or personal property.

The property must have been:

• lawfully in the defendant's possession; or
• lawfully in the possession of a member of the defendant's immediate family; or
• belonging to a person whose property the defendant has a legal duty to protect.

In determining reasonableness, you must consider:

• the apparent or perceived extent of the damage to the property;
• property damage previously caused by the other person;
• threats of personal injury or damage to property that have been made previously by the other person;
• any patterns of abuse or violence between the defendant and the other person; and
• any other relevant factor.

References

Committee Amended

CR1001 Preamble to Driving under the Influence Instructions.

In the realm of DUI, practitioners often request that the court give instructions that comment on the sufficiency, or relative quality, of evidence. Some examples of such instructions include:

• "Bookends"
• Standardized field sobriety tests (including horizontal gaze nystagmus)
• Baker waiting period
• Breath test
• "Mere consumption"
• "Under the influence"
• Margin of error

Instructions of this nature are disfavored and may run afoul of the Utah Supreme Court's admonition that trial courts should not comment upon the evidence. See State v. Pappacostas, 407 P.2d 576 (Utah 1965) and Utah R. Crim. P. 19(f).

Committee Amended

CR1003 Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol, Drugs, or Combination

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ____] with committing Driving Under the Influence of [Alcohol][Any Drug][the Combined Influence of Alcohol and Any Drug] [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME)
   1. operated a vehicle; or
   2. was in actual physical control of a vehicle; and
2. (DEFENDANT'S NAME):
   1. [had sufficient alcohol in [his][her] body that a subsequent chemical test showed that [he][she] had a blood or breath alcohol concentration of [.05][.08] grams or greater at the time of the test;]
   2. [was under the influence of [alcohol][any drug][the combined influence of alcohol and any drug] to a degree that rendered [him][her] incapable of safely operating a vehicle; or]
   3. [had a blood or breath alcohol concentration of [.05][.08] grams or greater at the time of operation or actual physical control].
3. [The defense of ________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1004 Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol, Drugs, or Combination

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ____] with committing Driving Under the Influence of [Alcohol][Any Drug][the Combined Influence of Alcohol and Any Drug] [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME)
   1. operated a vehicle; or
   2. was in actual physical control of a vehicle; and
2. (DEFENDANT'S NAME):
   1. [had sufficient alcohol in [his][her] body that a subsequent chemical test showed that [he][she] had a blood or breath alcohol concentration of [.05][.08] grams or greater at the time of the test;]
   2. [was under the influence of [alcohol][any drug][the combined influence of alcohol and any drug] to a degree that rendered [him][her] incapable of safely operating a vehicle; or]
   3. [had a blood or breath alcohol concentration of [.05][.08] grams or greater at the time of operation or actual physical control;] and
3. (DEFENDANT'S NAME):
   1. [operated the vehicle in a negligent manner which was the proximate cause of bodily injury upon [VICTIM'S NAME];]
   2. [had a passenger under 16 years of age in the vehicle at the time of the offense;]
   3. [was 21 years of age or older and had a passenger under 18 years of age in the vehicle at the time of the offense;]
   4. [operated a vehicle onto or from any controlled-access highway except at entrances and exits established by the appropriate highway authority; or]
   5. [on or after July 1, 2020, without being directed or permitted by a traffic-control device or peace officer:
      1. operated a vehicle on a divided highway using the left-hand roadway; or
      2. operated a vehicle over, across, or within any dividing space, median, or barrier of a divided highway.]
4. [The defense of ________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1005 Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol, Drugs, or Combination

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ____] with committing Driving Under the Influence of [Alcohol][Any Drug][the Combined Influence of Alcohol and Any Drug] [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME)
   1. operated a vehicle; or
   2. was in actual physical control of a vehicle; and
2. (DEFENDANT'S NAME):
   1. [had sufficient alcohol in [his][her] body that a subsequent chemical test showed that [he][she] had a blood or breath alcohol concentration of [.05][.08] grams or greater at the time of the test;]
   2. [was under the influence of [alcohol][any drug][the combined influence of alcohol and any drug] to a degree that rendered [him][her] incapable of safely operating a vehicle; or]
   3. [had a blood or breath alcohol concentration of [.05][.08] grams or greater at the time of operation or actual physical control;] and
3. (DEFENDANT'S NAME) operated the vehicle in a negligent manner which was the proximate cause of serious bodily injury upon [VICTIM'S NAME].
4. [The defense of ________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1201 Controlled Substance.

You are instructed that (NAME OF DRUG) is a [Schedule [I][II][III][IV][V] controlled substance][controlled substance analog].

References

Committee Notes

CR1202A General Definition of Possession of a Controlled Substance.

"Possession" of a controlled substance means:

• owning,
• controlling,
• holding,
• retaining,
• maintaining,
• applying,
• inhaling,
• swallowing,
• injecting, or
• consuming
• a controlled substance.

[For a person to possess a controlled substance, it is not required that the person individually possess it. It is sufficient if the person participated with one or more persons in the possession of a controlled substance with knowledge that the activity was occurring, or the controlled substance is found in a place or under circumstances indicating constructive possession.]

References

Committee Notes

CR1202B Definition of Constructive Possession.

A person is in constructive possession of [a controlled substance] [drug paraphernalia] when the person has the ability and the intent to exercise control over it. Factors relevant to deciding constructive possession may include the following:

• ownership and/or occupancy of the [residence] [vehicle] [property] [personal effects] where the [controlled substance] [drug paraphernalia] was found;
• whether that ownership or occupancy was exclusive;
• presence of the [controlled substance] [drug paraphernalia] in a location where (DEFENDANT'S NAME) had special control;
• whether other people also had access to the location of the drugs;
• presence of (DEFENDANT'S NAME) at the time the [controlled substance] [drug paraphernalia] was found;
• (DEFENDANT'S NAME) proximity to the [controlled substance] [drug paraphernalia];
• previous drug use;
• incriminating statements or behavior; or
• any other factor related to whether (DEFENDANT'S NAME) had the ability and intent to exercise control over the [controlled substance] [drug paraphernalia].

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1203 Possession of a Controlled Substance.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ___] with committing Possession of a Controlled Substance [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally and knowingly;
3. Possessed (NAME OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE/COUNTERFEIT SUBSTANCE), a schedule [I] [II] [III] [IV] [V] [controlled substance] [counterfeit substance][; and]
4. [The defense of ___________ does not apply].

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

CR1204 Possession with Intent to Distribute.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ___] with committing Possession of a [Controlled Substance] [Counterfeit Substance] with Intent to Distribute [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME)
2. Intentionally and knowingly possessed (NAME OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE/COUNTERFEIT SUBSTANCE), a schedule [I] [II] [III] [IV] [V] [controlled substance] [counterfeit substance];
3. With the intent to distribute that substance[; and]
4. [The defense of ___________ does not apply].

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

CR1205 Possession of an Altered or Forged Prescription or Written Order.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ___] with committing Possession of an Altered or Forged [Prescription] [Written Order [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally and knowingly possessed an altered or forged [prescription] [written order];
3. Knowing the altered or forged [prescription] [written order] is for a controlled substance [; and]
4. [The defense of ____________ does not apply].

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

CR1206 Possession of Drug Paraphernalia.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ___] with committing Possession of Drug Paraphernalia [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME)
2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly
1. Used drug paraphernalia or possessed drug paraphernalia with intent to use it, and
2. Did so [to [plant], [propagate], [cultivate], [grow], [harvest], [manufacture], [compound], [convert], [produce], [process], [prepare], [test], [analyze], [pack], [repack], [store], [contain], or [conceal] a controlled substance]; [OR] [to [inject], [ingest], [inhale] or otherwise introduce a controlled substance into the human body.]
3. [The defense of ___________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

CR1207 Definition of "Drug Paraphernalia".

You are instructed that "drug paraphernalia" means any equipment, product, or material used, or intended for use, to plant, propagate, cultivate, grow, harvest, manufacture, compound, convert, produce, process, prepare, test, analyze, package, repackage, store, contain, or conceal a controlled substance; OR to inject, ingest, inhale, or otherwise introduce a controlled substance into the human body,

Drug paraphernalia includes but is not limited to:

• [kits used, or intended for use, in planting, propagating, cultivating, growing, or harvesting any species of plant which is a controlled substance or from which a controlled substance can be derived];
• [kits used, or intended for use, in manufacturing, compounding, converting, producing, processing, or preparing a controlled substance];
• [isomerization devices used, or intended for use, to increase the potency of any species of plant which is a controlled substance];
• [testing equipment used, or intended for use, to identify or to analyze the strength, effectiveness, or purity of a controlled substance];
• [scales and balances used, or intended for use, in weighing or measuring a controlled substance];
• [diluents and adulterants, such as quinine hydrochloride, mannitol, mannited, dextrose and lactose, used, or intended for use to cut a controlled substance];
• [separation gins and sifters used, or intended for use to remove twigs, seeds, or other impurities from marihuana];
• [blenders, bowls, containers, spoons and mixing devices used, or intended for use to compound a controlled substance];
• [capsules, balloons, envelopes, and other containers used, or intended for use to package small quantities of a controlled substance];
• [containers and other objects used, or intended for use to store or conceal a controlled substance];
• [hypodermic syringes, needles, and other objects used, or intended for use to parenterally inject a controlled substance into the human body, except as provided in Section 58-37a-5]; and
• [objects used, or intended for use to ingest, inhale, or otherwise introduce a controlled substance into the human body, including but not limited to]:
• [metal, wooden, acrylic, glass, stone, plastic, or ceramic pipes with or without screens, permanent screens, hashish heads, or punctured metal bowls];
• [water pipes];
• [carburetion tubes and devices;]
• [smoking and carburetion masks];
• [roach clips: meaning objects used to hold burning material, such as a marihuana cigarette, that has become too small or too short to be held in the hand];
• [miniature cocaine spoons and cocaine vials];
• [chamber pipes];
• [carburetor pipes];
• [electric pipes];
• [air-driven pipes];
• [chillums];
• [bongs]; and
• [ice pipes or chillers].

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1208 Factors Relevant to Identifying Drug Paraphernalia.

In determining whether an object is drug paraphernalia, you should consider:

1. [statements by an owner or by anyone in control of the object concerning its use;]
2. [prior convictions, if any, of an owner, or of anyone in control of the object, under any state or federal law relating to a controlled substance;]
3. [the proximity of the object, in time and space, to a direct violation of this chapter;]
4. [the proximity of the object to a controlled substance;]
5. [the existence of any residue of a controlled substance on the object;]
6. [instructions whether oral or written, provided with the object concerning its use;]
7. [descriptive materials accompanying the object which explain or depict its use;]
8. [national and local advertising concerning its use;]
9. [the manner in which the object is displayed for sale;]
10. [whether the owner or anyone in control of the object is a legitimate supplier of like or related items to the community, such as a licensed distributor or dealer of tobacco products;]
11. [direct or circumstantial evidence of the ratio of sales of the object to the total sales of the business enterprise;]
12. [the existence and scope of legitimate uses of the object in the community;]
13. [whether the object is subject to Section 58-37a-5;]
14. [expert testimony concerning its use; and]
15. Any other logically relevant factor.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1209 Innocent Possession.

You must decide whether the State has proven that the defendant did not innocently possess the [controlled][chemical][counterfeit] substance. The defendant is not required to prove [he][she] innocently possessed the substance. Rather, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant did not innocently possess the substance. The State has the burden of proof at all times. A person innocently possesses a substance if

1. [he][she] obtained the substance innocently and possessed it with no illegal purpose; and
2. the defendant took or was taking adequate measures to rid [himself] [herself] of possession of the substance as promptly as reasonably possible.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1210 Distribution of a Controlled Substance.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ___] with committing Distribution of a [Controlled Substance] [Counterfeit Substance] [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally and knowingly:
1. [distributed (NAME OF CONTROLLED/COUNTERFEIT SUBSTANCE), a schedule [I] [II] [III] [IV] [V] [controlled substance] [counterfeit substance]]; [or]
2. [agreed, consented, offered, or arranged to distribute (NAME OF CONTROLLED/COUNTERFEIT SUBSTANCE), a schedule [I] [II] [III] [IV] [V] controlled substance] [counterfeit substance]]; [and]
3. [The defense of ___________ does not apply].

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

CR1211 Mere Presence is Not Sufficient.

The defendant's mere presence at the place where the [controlled substance][counterfeit substance][paraphernalia] is located is not sufficient on its own to prove that the defendant was in possession of the [controlled substance][counterfeit substance][paraphernalia].

References

Committee Notes

CR1212 Firearm Enhancement.

If you determine beyond a reasonable doubt that (DEFENDANT'S NAME) committed [Distribution of a [Controlled Substance][Counterfeit Substance]] [Possession of a [Controlled Substance][Counterfeit Substance] with Intent to Distribute], you must decide whether (DEFENDANT'S NAME) used a firearm during the commission of that crime. You cannot find that [he][she] used a firearm during the commission of the crime unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly used, carried, or possessed a firearm on his person or in his immediate possession during the commission or in furtherance of [distributing a [controlled substance][counterfeit substance]] [possessing a [controlled substance][counterfeit substance] with the intent distribute]

References

Committee Notes

CR1213 Special Enhancements.

Only use this instruction and the SPECIAL VERDICT FORM if you have found (DEFENDANT'S NAME) guilty of (NAME OF RELEVANT OFFENSE) as charged in Count ___.

If you found (DEFENDANT'S NAME) guilty of (NAME OF RELEVANT OFFENSE) as charged in Count ___, you must now decide whether any of the following circumstances have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

1. [in, on the grounds of, or within 100 feet of any structure, facility, or grounds of a public or private [elementary or secondary school][vocational school or postsecondary institution] between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m.]
2. [in, on the grounds of, or within 100 feet of any structure, facility, or grounds of a preschool or child-care facility during the preschool's or facility's hours of operation.]
3. [in or within 100 feet of any structure, facility, or grounds of a [public park][amusement park][arcade][recreation center] when the [public park][amusement park][arcade][recreation center] is open to the public.]
4. [in, on the grounds of, or within 100 feet of any structure, facility, or grounds of a house of worship.]
5. [in, on the grounds of, or within 100 feet of any structure, facility, or grounds of a library when the library is open to the public.]
6. [in the presence of a person younger than 18 years of age, regardless of where the act occurs.]
7. [for the purpose of facilitating, arranging, or causing the transport, delivery, or distribution of a [controlled][counterfeit] substance to an inmate or on the grounds of any correctional facility.]

References

Committee Notes

CR1214 Special Enhancements - Not a Defense.

[(DEFENDANT'S NAME)'s belief or ignorance about the person's age is not a defense.]

[(DEFENDANT'S NAME)'s belief or ignorance about whether the location was (ONE OF LOCATIONS IDENTIFIED IN SPECIAL ENHANCEMENT INSTRUCTION) is not a defense.]

References

Committee Notes

CR1215 Relevant Definitions.

[A "house of worship" means a church, temple, synagogue, mosque, or other building set apart primarily for the purpose of worship in which religious services are held and the main body of which is kept for that use and not put to any other use inconsistent with its primary purpose]. See Utah Code § 76-10-501.

[A "correctional facility" means:

1. any facility operated by or contracting with the Department of Corrections to house offenders in either a secure or nonsecure setting;
2. any facility operated by a municipality or a county to house or detain criminal offenders;
3. any juvenile detention facility; and
4. any building or grounds appurtenant to the facility or lands granted to the state, municipality, or county for use as a correctional facility.] See Utah Code § 76-8-311.3).

[A "firearm" means a pistol, revolver, shotgun, short barreled shotgun, rifle or short barreled rifle, or a device that could be used as a dangerous weapon from which is expelled a projectile by action of an explosive.] See Utah Code § 76-10-501.

CR1300 Assault.

CR1301 Definitions for Assault and Related Offenses

["Bodily injury" means physical pain, illness, or any impairment of physical condition.]

["Substantial bodily injury" means bodily injury, not amounting to serious bodily injury, that creates or causes protracted physical pain, temporary disfigurement, or temporary loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.]

["Serious bodily injury" means bodily injury that creates or causes serious permanent disfigurement, protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ, or creates a substantial risk of death.]

Reference: Utah Code § 76-1-601

["Dangerous weapon" means:

1. any item capable of causing death or serious bodily injury; or
2. a facsimile or representation of the item, if:
   1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME)'s use or apparent intended use of the item leads (VICTIM'S NAME) to reasonably believe the item is likely to cause death or serious bodily injury; or
   2. (DEFENDANT'S NAME) represents to (VICTIM'S NAME) verbally or in any other manner that [he][she] is in control of such an item.]

Reference: Utah Code § 76-1-601

["Military servicemember in uniform" means:

1. a member of any branch of the United States military who is wearing a uniform as authorized by the member's branch of service; or
2. a member of the National Guard [ordered into active service by the governor][called into service by the President of the United States].]

Reference: Utah Code §§ 76-5-102.4(1)(b), 39-1-5, and 39-1-9

["Peace officer" means:

1. a law enforcement officer, defined as [insert appropriate definition under Section 53-13-103];
2. a correctional officer, defined as [insert appropriate definition under Section 53-13-104];
3. a special function officer, defined as [insert appropriate definition under Section 53-13-105]; or
4. a federal officer, defined as [insert appropriate definition under Section 53-13-106].]

Reference: Utah Code § 76-5-102.4(1)(c)

["Targeting a law enforcement officer" means the commission of any offense involving the unlawful use of force and violence against a law enforcement officer, causing serious bodily injury or death in furtherance of political or social objectives in order to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or to influence or affect the conduct of a government or a unit of government.]

Reference: Utah Code § 76-5-210

References

Committee Amended

CR1302 Misdemeanor Assaults

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ____] with committing Assault [against a Pregnant Person][that Caused Substantial Bodily Injury] [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
   1. intentionally or knowingly attempted, with unlawful force or violence, to do bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or
   2. intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly committed an act with unlawful force or violence that
      1. caused bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or
      2. created a substantial risk of bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME).
2. [The act caused substantial bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME).]
3. [(VICTIM'S NAME) was pregnant, and (DEFENDANT'S NAME) had knowledge of the pregnancy.]
4. [The defense of _______________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1303 Assault Against School Employees

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ____] with committing Assault Against a School Employee [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
   1. [intentionally or knowingly attempted, with unlawful force or violence, to do bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
   2. [intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly
      1. [committed an act with unlawful force or violence that
         1. caused bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or
         2. created a substantial risk of bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
      2. [threatened to commit any offense involving bodily injury, death, or substantial property damage, and acted with intent to place (VICTIM'S NAME) in fear of imminent serious bodily injury, substantial bodily injury, or death; or]
      3. [made a threat, accompanied by a show of immediate force or violence, to do bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME);]]
2. (DEFENDANT'S NAME) had knowledge that (VICTIM'S NAME) was an employee or volunteer of a public or private school;
3. (VICTIM'S NAME) was acting within the scope of (his)(her) authority as an employee or volunteer of a public or private school; and
4. [The defense of _______________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Amended

CR1304 Assault Against a Peace Officer

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ____] with committing Assault Against a Peace Officer [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
   1. [intentionally or knowingly attempted, with unlawful force or violence, to do bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
   2. [intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly
      1. [committed an act with unlawful force or violence that
         1. caused bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or
         2. created a substantial risk of bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
      2. [threatened to commit any offense involving bodily injury, death, or substantial property damage, and acted with intent to place (VICTIM'S NAME) in fear of imminent serious bodily injury, substantial bodily injury, or death; or]
      3. [made a threat, accompanied by a show of immediate force or violence, to do bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME);]]
2. (DEFENDANT'S NAME) had knowledge that (VICTIM'S NAME) was a peace officer;
3. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME):
   1. [has been previously convicted of a class A misdemeanor or a felony violation of Assault Against a Peace Officer or Assault Against a Military Servicemember in Uniform;]
   2. [caused substantial bodily injury;]
   3. [used a dangerous weapon; or]
   4. [used means or force likely to produce death or serious bodily injury]]
4. (VICTIM'S NAME) was acting within the scope of (his)(her) authority as a peace officer; and
5. [The defense of _______________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1305 Assault Against a Military Servicemember in Uniform

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ____] with committing Assault Against a Military Servicemember in Uniform [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
   1. [intentionally or knowingly attempted, with unlawful force or violence, to do bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
   2. [intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly
      1. [committed an act with unlawful force or violence that
         1. caused bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or
         2. created a substantial risk of bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
      2. [threatened to commit any offense involving bodily injury, death, or substantial property damage, and acted with intent to place (VICTIM'S NAME) in fear of imminent serious bodily injury, substantial bodily injury, or death; or]
      3. [made a threat, accompanied by a show of immediate force or violence, to do bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME);]]
2. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME):
   1. [has been previously convicted of a class A misdemeanor or a felony violation of Assault Against a Peace Officer or Assault Against a Military Servicemember in Uniform;]
   2. [caused substantial bodily injury;]
   3. [used a dangerous weapon; or]
   4. [used means or force likely to produce death or serious bodily injury;] and]
3. (VICTIM'S NAME) was on orders and acting within the scope of authority granted to the military servicemember in uniform.
4. [The defense of _______________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1306 Assault by Prisoner

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ____] with committing Assault by Prisoner [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intending to cause bodily injury;
   1. [intentionally or knowingly attempted, with unlawful force or violence, to do bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
   2. [intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly committed an act with unlawful force or violence that
      1. caused bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or
      2. created a substantial risk of bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME);] and
3. At the time of the act (DEFENDANT'S NAME) was
   1. in the custody of a peace officer pursuant to a lawful arrest; or
   2. was confined in a [jail or other penal institution][a facility used for confinement of delinquent juveniles] regardless of whether the confinement is legal; and
4. [The defense of _______________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Amended

CR1320 Aggravated Assault

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ____] with committing Aggravated Assault [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME)
   1. [intentionally or knowingly attempted, with unlawful force or violence, to do bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
   2. [intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly
      1. made a threat, accompanied by a show of immediate force or violence, to do bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or
      2. committed an act with unlawful force or violence that
         1. caused bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or
         2. created a substantial risk of bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); and]
2. (DEFENDANT'S NAME)
   1. [used a dangerous weapon; or]
   2. [committed any act that interfered with the breathing or the circulation of blood of (VICTIM'S NAME) by use of unlawful force or violence that was likely to produce a loss of consciousness by:
      1. applying pressure to the neck or throat of (VICTIM'S NAME); or
      2. obstructing the nose, mouth, or airway of (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
   3. [used [other] means or force likely to produce death or serious bodily injury]; and
3. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME)'s actions
   1. [resulted in serious bodily injury; or]
   2. [produced a loss of consciousness by impeding the breathing or circulation of blood of (VICTIM'S NAME).] and];
4. [The defense of _______________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1321 Aggravated Assault by Prisoner

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ____] with committing Aggravated Assault By Prisoner [on or about (DATE)]. You cannot convict [him] [her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
   1. [intentionally or knowingly attempted, with unlawful force or violence, to do bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
   2. [intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly
      1. made a threat, accompanied by a show of immediate force or violence, to do bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or
      2. committed an act with unlawful force or violence that
         1. caused bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME); or
         2. created a substantial risk of bodily injury to (VICTIM'S NAME);] and
2. (DEFENDANT'S NAME)
   1. [used a dangerous weapon; or]
   2. [committed an act that interfered with the breathing or the circulation of blood of (VICTIM'S NAME) by use of unlawful force or violence that was likely to produce a loss of consciousness by:
      1. applying pressure to the neck or throat of (VICTIM'S NAME); or
      2. obstructing the nose, mouth, or airway of (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
   3. [used [other] means or force likely to produce death or serious bodily injury]; and
3. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) intentionally caused serious bodily injury]; and
4. At the time of the act (DEFENDANT'S NAME) was
   1. in the custody of a peace officer pursuant to a lawful arrest; or
   2. was confined in a [jail or other penal institution][facility used for confinement of delinquent juveniles] regardless of whether the confinement is legal; and
5. [The defense of _______________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1322 Aggravated Assault - Targeting a Law Enforcement Officer - Special Verdict Instructions

If you find (DEFENDANT'S NAME) guilty of Aggravated Assault, you must determine whether (DEFENDANT'S NAME) Targeted a Law Enforcement Officer at the time of this offense. To find (DEFENDANT'S NAME) Targeted a Law Enforcement Officer, you must find all three elements below beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. the aggravated assault resulted in serious bodily injury;
2. the defendant knowingly used force against a law enforcement officer; and
3. the defendant's use of force was in furtherance of political or social objectives in order to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or to influence or affect the conduct of a government or a unit of government.

The State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that (DEFENDANT'S NAME) Targeted a Law Enforcement Officer. Your decision must be unanimous and should be reflected on the special verdict form.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1330 Domestic Violence - Special Verdict Definitions

"Reside" means to dwell permanently or for a length of time; to have a settled abode for a time; to dwell permanently or continuously.

"Residence" is defined as "a temporary or permanent dwelling place, abode, or habitation to which one intends to return as distinguished from a place of temporary sojourn or transient visit." It does not require an intention to make the place one's home. It is possible that a person may have more than one residence at a time.

When determining whether (DEFENDANT'S NAME) and (VICTIM'S NAME) resided in the same residence, factors to consider include the following:

• the amount of time one spends at the shared abode and the amount of effort expended in its upkeep;
• whether a person is free to come and go as he pleases, treating the place as if it were his own home;
• whether there has been a sharing of living expenses or sharing of financial obligations for the maintenance of a household;
• whether there has been sexual contact evidencing a conjugal association;
• whether furniture or personal items have been moved into a purported residence;
• voting, owning property, paying taxes, having family in the area, maintaining a mailing address, being born or raised in the area, working or operating a business, and having children attend school in the forum.

In deciding whether (DEFENDANT'S NAME) and (VICTIM'S NAME) were residing in the same residence, you are not limited to the factors listed above, but you may also apply the common, ordinary meaning of the definition to all of the facts and circumstances of this case.

References

Committee Amended

CR1331 Domestic Violence - Special Verdict Instructions

If you find (DEFENDANT'S NAME) guilty of [CRIME], you must determine whether (DEFENDANT'S NAME) and (VICTIM'S NAME) were cohabitants at the time of this offense. To find (DEFENDANT'S NAME) was a cohabitant with (VICTIM'S NAME), you must find beyond a reasonable doubt, that (DEFENDANT'S NAME) and (VICTIM'S NAME) were 16 years of age or older, and at the time of the offense, (DEFENDANT'S NAME):

• [Is or was a spouse of (VICTIM'S NAME);]
• [Is or was living as if a spouse of (VICTIM'S NAME);]
• [Is related by blood or marriage to (VICTIM'S NAME) as (VICTIM'S NAME)'s parent, grandparent, sibling, or any other person related to (VICTIM'S NAME) by consanguinity or affinity to the second degree;]
• [Has or had one or more children in common with (VICTIM'S NAME);]
• [Is the biological parent of (VICTIM'S NAME)'s unborn child;]
• [Resides or has resided in the same residence as (VICTIM'S NAME);] or
• [Is or was in a consensual sexual relationship with (VICTIM'S NAME)].

The State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that (DEFENDANT'S NAME) and (VICTIM'S NAME) were cohabitants at the time of this offense. Your decision must be unanimous and should be reflected on the special verdict form.

References

Committee Amended

CR1401 Practitioner's Note: Explanation Concerning Homicide Elements Instructions.

Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-201 defining criminal homicide, does not now (although it once did) include the term "unlawfully," nor do any of the specific homicide sections. Utah law does not require the prosecution to negate lawful justification or excuse, unless the defense is an issue as a result of evidence presented at trial by either side. Utah Code Ann. § 76-1-502. See also State v. Knoll, 712 P.2d 211 (Utah 1985).

Jury instructions in homicide cases have sometimes included the element of "unlawfully" causing the death of the victim. "Unlawfully" means without legal justification or excuse. In some cases, the "legal justification or excuse" may constitute a complete defense, such as, for example, self-defense or insanity. In other cases, it may only constitute a partial defense, such as where extreme emotional distress, imperfect self-defense, or special mitigation are at issue. (Note that there are separate elements instructions for cases involving partial defenses.)

Consequently, the phrase "the defendant caused the death without legal justification or excuse" is bracketed in the elements instructions, indicating that it is only to be used if legal justification or excuse is at issue. A note at the end of each homicide elements instruction also recommends that practitioners tailor this element to the specific issue in the case. For example, where self-defense is at issue, the bracketed element would read, "That the defendant did not act in self-defense."

Finally, special verdicts should be used in aggravated murder cases when there are multiple aggravating circumstances alleged, in order to clearly indicate the basis for the jury's verdict. Special verdicts are also required in murder cases in which special mitigation is at issue, pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-205.5.

CR1402 Aggravated Murder Elements - Utah Code sect. 76-5-202(1).

The defendant, (DEFENDANT'S NAME), is charged with Aggravated Murder. You cannot convict (him)(her) of this offense unless you find beyond a reasonable doubt, based on the evidence, each of the following elements:

1. That the defendant, (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally or knowingly;
3. Caused the death of (VICTIM'S NAME);
4. Under one or more of the following circumstances: [Insert All Applicable Aggravating Circumstances][;and]
5. [The defense of _______________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY of Aggravated Murder. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that all of these elements have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY of Aggravated Murder.

Committee Notes

CR1403 Aggravated Murder Elements - Utah Code sect. 76-5-202(2).

The defendant, (DEFENDANT'S NAME), is charged with Aggravated Murder. You cannot convict (him)(her) of this offense unless you find beyond a reasonable doubt, based on the evidence, each of the following elements:

1. That the defendant, (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. With reckless indifference to human life;
3. Caused the death of (VICTIM'S NAME); and
4. That the defendant did so incident to an act, scheme, course of conduct, or criminal episode during which (he)(she) was a major participant in the commission or attempted commission of: [Insert All Applicable Predicate Felonies][;and]
5. [The defense of _______________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY of Aggravated Murder. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that all of these elements have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY of Aggravated Murder.

Committee Notes

CR1404 Aggravated Murder Elements When Extreme Emotional Distress Is at Issue.

The defendant, [DEFENDANT'S NAME], is charged with Aggravated Murder. You cannot convict (him) (her) of this offense unless you find beyond a reasonable doubt, based on the evidence, each of the following elements:

1. That the defendant, [DEFENDANT'S NAME];
2. Intentionally or knowingly;
3. Caused the death of [VICTIM'S NAME]; and
4. That the defendant did so under any one or more of the following circumstances: (INSERT ALL APPLICABLE AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES HERE); and
5. That the defendant did not cause the death of [VICTIM'S NAME] under the influence of extreme emotional distress for which there is a reasonable explanation or excuse.
6. [The defense of _______________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY of Aggravated Murder. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that one or more of these elements has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY of Aggravated Murder.

Committee Notes

CR1405 Explanation of Depraved Indifference.

A person is guilty of murder if, acting under circumstances that demonstrate a depraved indifference to human life, (he)(she) knowingly engages in conduct that creates a grave risk of death and, in fact, causes the death of another.

"Depraved indifference to human life" means an utter callousness toward the value of human life and a complete indifference as to whether the actor's conduct will create a grave risk of death to another.

To act with "depraved indifference," the actor must do more than act recklessly. However, (he)(she) does not have to have a conscious desire to cause death, nor does (he)(she) need to be aware that the conduct is reasonably certain to cause death.

In the context of "depraved indifference murder," "knowingly" means that the person knew:

A "grave risk of death" means more than a substantial and unjustifiable risk; there must be a high likelihood that death will result.

In order to find depraved indifference, you must evaluate all the circumstances surrounding the death from the standpoint of a reasonable person in the actor's position.

In evaluating the evidence, you should consider the following factors: (1) the social value of the defendant's conduct; (2) the magnitude of the risk; (3) the defendant's knowledge of the risk; and (4) any precautions taken by the defendant to minimize the risk.

References

CR1406 Explanation of Heinousness for Aggravated Murder Cases.

"Heinous," "atrocious," "cruel," or "exceptionally depraved" refers to the physical torture, serious physical abuse, or serious bodily injury inflicted upon the deceased before death. The actor's intent in committing these acts must be to cause wholly unnecessary suffering to the deceased, rather than simply to kill (him)(her).

CR1407 Definition of "In the Commission of" for Murder Cases.

The phrase "in the commission of" ["in the attempted commission of," or "in the flight from the commission or attempted commission of"] (CRIME) means that there was no break in the chain of events connecting the homicide and the (CRIME).

Committee Notes

CR1408 Definition of "While Committing" for Aggravated Murder Cases.

The phrase "in the commission of" ["in the attempted commission of," or "in the flight from the commission or attempted commission of"] (CRIME) means that there was no break in the chain of events connecting the homicide with the (CRIME).

References

Committee Notes

CR1409 Definition of "Incident to One Act, Scheme, Course of Conduct, or Criminal Episode" for Aggravated Murder Cases.

The phrase "incident to one act, scheme, course of conduct, or criminal episode" means that the acts constituting the homicide and the acts constituting [CRIME] are linked by time, place, manner, purpose, or a combination of the four.

Committee Notes

CR1411 Murder

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count __] with committing Murder [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict (him)(her) of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME)
2. 1. [intentionally or knowingly caused the death of (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
   2. [intending to cause serious bodily injury to another, (DEFENDANT'S NAME) committed an act clearly dangerous to human life that caused the death of (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
   3. [acting under circumstances evidencing a depraved indifference to human life, (DEFENDANT'S NAME) knowingly engaged in conduct which created a grave risk of death to another and thereby caused the death of (VICTIM'S NAME); or]
   4. [while engaging in the commission, attempted commission, or immediate flight from the commission or attempted commission of [the predicate offense(s)], or as a party to [the predicate offense(s)],
      1. (VICTIM'S NAME) was killed;
      2. (VICTIM'S NAME) was not a party to [the predicate offense(s)]; and
      3. (DEFENDANT'S NAME) acted with the intent required as an element of [the predicate offense(s)]; or]
   5. [recklessly caused the death of (VICTIM'S NAME), a peace officer or military service member in uniform while in the commission of
      1. an assault against a peace officer;
      2. interference with a peace officer making a lawful arrest, if (DEFENDANT'S NAME) used force against a peace officer; or
      3. an assault against a military service member in uniform.]
3. [The defense of _____________________ does not apply.]

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1420 Extreme emotional distress mitigation.

You have heard me say repeatedly that the prosecution bears the burden of proof at all times in a criminal case. There is one exception to this rule, which I will discuss with you now.

Under Utah law, special mitigation exists when a defendant causes the death or attempts to cause the death of another person while the defendant is under extreme emotional distress.

"Extreme emotional distress" means that the defendant had an overwhelming reaction of anger, shock, or grief that:

(1) caused the defendant to be incapable of reflection and restraint; and

(2) would cause an objectively reasonable person to be incapable of reflection and restraint.

The first factor is a subjective factor, and the second factor is an objective factor.

The defendant is required to prove extreme emotional distress by a preponderance of the evidence.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1421 Extreme emotional distress mitigation - Factors.

In considering the first subjective factor, the defendant must be acting under the influence of extreme emotional distress at the time he causes or attempts to cause the death of another.

A defendant may prove that he was subjectively under the influence of extreme emotional distress by showing:

(1) he was exposed to extremely unusual and overwhelming stress,

(2) he had an extreme emotional reaction to it, as a result of which he experienced a loss of self-control and his reason was overborne by intense feelings, such as passion, anger, distress, grief, excessive agitation, or other similar emotions,

(3) his emotional distress was not a condition resulting from mental illness, and

(4) his emotional distress was not substantially caused by his own conduct.

In considering the second objective factor, the circumstances must support a reasonable explanation or excuse for the extreme emotional distress. This factor asks whether a reasonable person facing the same situation would have reacted in a similar way. Reasonableness shall be determined from the viewpoint of a reasonable person under the then-existing circumstances.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1422 Extreme emotional distress mitigation - Applicability.

Extreme emotional distress exists if the circumstances support that the defendant acted predominantly in response to a highly provoking act by the other person, which provoking act immediately preceded the defendant's actions.

Extreme emotional distress does not include distress that is substantially caused by the defendant's own conduct.

In addition, special mitigation for extreme emotional distress does not exist if:

(1) a period of time has passed long enough for a reasonable person to have recovered from the extreme emotional distress;

(2) the defendant responded to the circumstances by inflicting serious or substantial bodily injury over a prolonged period of time or inflicted torture; or

(3) the other person's highly provoking act was comprised of words alone.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1423 Extreme emotional distress mitigation - Burden of proof.

A defendant is required to establish the special mitigation of extreme emotional distress by a preponderance of the evidence. I have already instructed you on the reasonable doubt standard that applies to the prosecution; and now I will instruct you on the preponderance of the evidence standard that applies to the defendant.

Under the preponderance of the evidence standard, the defendant must persuade you, by the evidence, that a particular fact is more likely to be true than not true.

Another way of saying this is proof by the greater weight of the evidence, however slight. Weighing the evidence does not mean counting the number of witnesses nor the amount of testimony. Rather, it means evaluating the persuasive character of the evidence. In weighing the evidence, you should consider all of the evidence that applies to a particular fact, no matter which party presented it. The weight to be given to each piece of evidence is for you to decide.

After weighing all of the evidence, if you decide that the facts for extreme emotional distress are more likely true than not, then you must find that the defendant has proved that fact. On the other hand, if you decide that the evidence regarding the facts for extreme emotional distress is evenly balanced or is not more likely true, then you must find that the fact has not been proved by the defendant.

Your decision on special mitigation, extreme emotional distress, will be reflected in the Special Verdict Form.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1450 Practitioner's Note: Explanation Concerning Imperfect Self-Defense

Imperfect self-defense is an affirmative defense that can reduce aggravated murder to murder, attempted aggravated murder to attempted murder, murder to manslaughter, and attempted murder to attempted manslaughter. See Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-202(4) (aggravated murder); Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-203(4) (murder).

When the defense is asserted, the State must disprove the defense beyond a reasonable doubt before the defendant can be convicted of the greater crime. If the State cannot disprove the defense beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant can be convicted only of the lesser crime.

Instructing the jury on imperfect self-defense has proved to be problematic because many practitioners have tried to include the defense as an element of either or both of the greater crime and the reduced crime. The inevitable result is that the elements instruction on the reduced crime misstates the burden of proof on the defense as it applies to that reduced crime. See, e.g., State v. Lee, 2014 UT App 4, 318 P.3d 1164.

To avoid these problems, these instructions direct the jury to decide the defense exclusively through a special verdict form. Under this approach, the jury is given a standard elements instruction on the greater offense, with no element addressing imperfect self-defense. If the jury finds that the State has proved the elements of the greater offense beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury enters a guilty verdict on that offense. The jury is directed to the imperfect self-defense instructions and instructed that it must complete the imperfect self-defense special verdict form. On the special verdict form, the jury must indicate whether it has unanimously found that the State disproved the defense beyond a reasonable doubt. If the jury indicates the State has disproved the defense, the trial court enters a conviction for the greater crime. If the jury indicates the State has not disproved the defense, the trial court enters a conviction for the lesser crime.

The committee considered State v. Drej, 2010 UT 35, 233 P.3d 476, and concluded that it does not preclude this approach.

Committee Notes

CR1451 Definition of Imperfect Self-Defense

Defense of Self or Other is also sometimes called perfect self-defense because it is a complete defense to [Aggravated Murder] [Attempted Aggravated Murder] [Murder] [Attempted Murder] [Manslaughter]. Another form of self-defense is called imperfect self-defense because it is only a partial defense, not a complete defense, to [Aggravated Murder] [Attempted Aggravated Murder] [Murder] [Attempted Murder]. Imperfect self-defense reduces the level of the offense.

Imperfect self-defense applies when the defendant [caused the death] [attempted to cause the death] of another while incorrectly, but reasonably, believing that his/her conduct was legally justified or excused. In other words, it applies when a defendant makes a reasonable mistake of law—when he acts under a reasonable belief that the circumstances provided a legal justification or excuse for his conduct although the conduct was not legally justifiable or excusable under the existing circumstances. The reasonable belief of the defendant shall be determined from the viewpoint of a reasonable person under the circumstances.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1452 Imperfect Self-Defense: Prosecution's Burden

The defendant is not required to prove that imperfect self-defense applies. Rather, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that imperfect self-defense does not apply.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1453 Explanation of Special Verdict Instructions -- Perfect and Imperfect Self-Defense as Defenses

As Instruction ____ provides, for you to find the defendant guilty of [Aggravated Murder] [Attempted Aggravated Murder] [Murder] [Attempted Murder] [Manslaughter], the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that perfect self-defense does not apply. Consequently, your decision regarding perfect self-defense will be reflected in the “Verdict” form for Count [#].

If you find the defendant guilty of [Aggravated Murder] [Attempted Aggravated Murder] [Murder] [Attempted Murder], you must also consider imperfect self-defense. The State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that imperfect self-defense does not apply. Your decision regarding imperfect self-defense will be reflected in the special verdict form titled “Special Verdict Form Imperfect Self-Defense.”

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1601 Definitions.

["Bodily injury" means physical pain, illness, or any physical impairment.]

["Serious bodily injury" means bodily injury that creates a substantial risk of death or creates or causes serious permanent disfigurement or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.]

Reference: Utah Code § 76-1-601

["Dangerous weapon" means:

1. any item capable of causing death or serious bodily injury; or
2. a facsimile or representation of the item, if:
1. the actor's use or apparent intended use of the item leads the victim to reasonably believe the item is likely to cause death or serious bodily injury;
2. or the actor represents to the victim verbally or in any other manner that he is in control of such an item.]

Reference: Utah Code § 76-1-601

["Grievous sexual offense" means rape; rape of a child; object rape; object rape of a child; forcible sodomy; sodomy on a child; aggravated sexual abuse of a child; aggravated sexual assault; any felony attempt to commit one of the above offenses; or an offense in another state, territory, or district of the United States that, if committed in Utah, would constitute one of the above offenses.]

Reference: Utah Code § 76-1-601

["Health professional" means an individual who is licensed or who holds himself or herself out to be licensed, or who otherwise provides professional physical or mental health services, diagnosis, treatment, or counseling including, but not limited to, a physician, osteopathic physician, nurse, dentist, physical therapist, chiropractor, mental health therapist, social service worker, clinical social worker, certified social worker, marriage and family therapist, professional counselor, psychiatrist, psychologist, psychiatric mental health nurse specialist, or substance abuse counselor.]

Reference: Utah Code § 76-5-406

["Indecent liberties" means:

1. touching [(VICTIM'S NAME) (MINOR'S INITIALS)]'s genitals, anus, buttocks, pubic area, or female breast;
2. causing any part of [(VICTIM'S NAME) (MINOR'S INITIALS)]'s body to touch the actor's or another's genitals, pubic area, anus, buttocks, or female breast;
3. simulating or pretending to engage in sexual intercourse with [(VICTIM'S NAME) (MINOR'S INITIALS)], including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal intercourse; or
4. causing [(VICTIM'S NAME) (MINOR'S INITIALS)] to simulate or pretend to engage in sexual intercourse with the actor or another, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal intercourse.]

Reference: Utah Code Ann. § 76-5-416

Committee Note: The legislature enacted the above definition, effective May 14, 2019. Before that date, the definition was based upon case law. See, e.g., State v. Lewis, 2014 UT App 241, 337 P.3d 1053; State v. Peters, 796 P.2d 708 (Utah App. 1990)

["Position of special trust" means an adoptive parent; an adult athletic manager; an aunt; a babysitter; a coach; an adult cohabitant of a parent; a counselor; a doctor or physician; an employer; a foster parent; a grandparent; a legal guardian; a natural parent; an adult recreational leader; a religious leader; an adult sibling or stepsibling; an adult scout leader; a stepparent; a teacher or any other person employed by or volunteering at a public or private elementary school or secondary school, and who is 18 years of age or older; an uncle; an adult youth leader; any other person in a position of authority that enables the person to exercise undue influence over the child.]

Reference: Utah Code § 76-5-404.1

["Religious counselor" means a minister, priest, rabbi, bishop, or other recognized member of the clergy.]

Reference: Utah Code § 76-5-406

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1602 Sexual Abuse of a Minor.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count __] with committing Sexual Abuse of a Minor [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict [him][her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:
   1. [touched (MINOR'S INITIALS)'s anus, buttocks, or any part of (his)(her) genitals, even if accomplished through clothing;] or
   2. [touched (FEMALE MINOR'S INITIALS)'s breast, even if accomplished through clothing;] or
   3. [otherwise took indecent liberties with (MINOR'S INITIALS);] or
   4. [caused (MINOR'S INITIALS) to take indecent liberties with any person;]
3. With the intent [to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person] [to cause substantial emotional or bodily pain to any person];
4. (MINOR'S INITIALS) was 14 or 15 years old at the time of the conduct; and
5. (DEFENDANT'S NAME) was seven or more years older than (MINOR'S INITIALS).

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1603 Unlawful Sexual Activity with a Minor.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count _____] with committing Unlawful Sexual Activity with a Minor [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict [him][her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt all of the elements in one or more of the following variations:

VARIATION A:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);

2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly had sexual intercourse;

3. With (MINOR'S INITIALS); and

4. (MINOR'S INITIALS) was 14 or 15 years old at the time of the conduct.

[OR]

VARIATION B:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);

2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly engaged in any sexual act with (MINOR'S INITIALS);

3. The sexual act involved touching, however slight, of the genitals of one person with the mouth or anus of another;

4. The touching of (MINOR'S INITIALS)'s genitals, mouth or anus involved (MINOR'S INITIALS)'s skin; and

5. (MINOR'S INITIALS) was 14 or 15 years old at the time of the conduct.

[OR]

VARIATION C:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);

2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly caused the penetration, however slight, of the genital or anal opening of (MINOR'S INITIALS) by any foreign object, substance, instrument, or device, including a part of the human body;

3. With the intent [to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person] [to cause substantial emotional or bodily pain to any person]; and

4. (MINOR'S INITIALS) was 14 or 15 years old at the time of the conduct.

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element of [one or more of the above variations] has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element [of at least one of the above variations] has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1604 Unlawful Sexual Conduct with a 16 or 17 Year Old.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ___] with committing Unlawful Sexual Conduct with a 16 or 17 year old [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict [him][her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:
   1. [had sexual intercourse with (MINOR'S INITIALS);] or
   2. [engaged in any sexual act with (MINOR'S INITIALS) involving the touching, however slight, of the genitals of one person with the mouth or anus of another, even if accomplished through clothing;] or
   3. [caused the penetration, however slight, of the genital or anal opening of (MINOR'S INITIALS) by any foreign object, substance, instrument, or device, including a part of the human body:
      1. [with the intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person]; or
      2. [with the intent to cause substantial emotional or bodily pain to any person];] or
   4. [touched (MINOR'S INITIALS)'s anus, buttocks, or any part of (his)(her) genitals, even if accomplished through clothing, or touched (FEMALE MINOR'S INITIALS)'s breast, even if accomplished through clothing, or otherwise took indecent liberties with (MINOR'S INITIALS), or caused (MINOR'S INITIALS) to take indecent liberties with the defendant or another person:
   1. [with the intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person]; or
   2. [with the intent to cause substantial emotional or bodily pain to any person].]
3. At the time of the conduct, (MINOR'S INITIALS) was 16 or 17 years old; and
4. At the time of the conduct, (DEFENDANT'S NAME) was:
   1. [seven or more but less than ten years older than (MINOR'S INITIALS), and (DEFENDANT'S NAME) knew or reasonably should have known (MINOR'S INITIALS)'s age]; or
   2. [ten or more years older than (MINOR'S INITIALS)].

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element [of one or more of the above variations] has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element [of at least one of the above variations] has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1605 Rape.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count__] with committing Rape [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict [him][her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);

2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly had sexual intercourse with (VICTIM'S NAME);

3. Without (VICTIM'S NAME)'s consent; and

4. (DEFENDANT'S NAME) acted with intent, knowledge or recklessness that (VICTIM'S NAME) did not consent.

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1606 Rape of a Child.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count__] with committing Rape of a Child [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict [him][her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
   1. intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly;
   2. had sexual intercourse with (MINOR'S INITIALS); and
2. (MINOR'S INITIALS) was under 14 years old at the time of the conduct.

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1607 Object Rape.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ___] with committing Object Rape [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict [him][her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly caused the penetration, however slight, of [([VICTIM'S NAME][MINOR'S INITIALS])'s anal opening] [([VICTIM'S NAME] [MINOR'S INITIALS])'s genital opening, including the outer folds of the labia], by any object or substance other than the mouth or genitals;
3. The act was without ([VICTIM'S NAME] [MINOR'S INITIALS])'s consent;
4. (DEFENDANT'S NAME) acted with intent, knowledge, or recklessness that ([VICTIM'S NAME] [MINOR'S INITIALS]) did not consent; and
5. (DEFENDANT'S NAME) did the act with the intent to:
   1. cause substantial emotional or bodily pain to ([VICTIM'S NAME] [MINOR'S INITIALS]); or
   2. arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1608 Object Rape of a Child.

DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ___] with committing Object Rape of a Child [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict [him][her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly caused the penetration or touched the skin, however slight, of (MINOR'S INITIALS)'s genital or anal opening with any object or substance that is not a part of the human body;
3. With the intent to:
1. cause substantial emotional or bodily pain to (MINOR'S INITIALS); or
2. arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person; and
4. (MINOR'S INITIALS) was under the age of 14 at the time of the conduct.

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1609 Forcible Sodomy.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count ___] with committing Forcible Sodomy [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict [him][her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly committed a sexual act involving any touching of the skin, however slight, of the genitals of one person and the mouth or anus of another;
3. Without (VICTIM'S NAME)'s consent; and
4. (DEFENDANT'S NAME) acted with intent, knowledge or recklessness that (VICTIM'S NAME) did not consent.

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1610 Sodomy on a Child.

CR1610 Sodomy on a Child.

(DEFENDANT’S NAME) is charged [in Count ___] with committing Sodomy on a Child [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict [him][her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT’S NAME);

2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly committed a sexual act with (MINOR’S INITIALS), involving any touching, however slight, of the genitals or anus of one person and the mouth or anus of the other, even if accomplished through clothing; and

3. (MINOR’S INITIALS) was under the age of 14 at the time of the conduct.

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

MUJI 1st Instruction

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1611 Forcible Sexual Abuse.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count__] with committing Forcible Sexual Abuse [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict [him][her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:
   1. [touched ([VICTIM'S NAME] [MINOR'S INITIALS])'s anus, buttocks, or genitals, even if accomplished through the clothing;] or
   2. touched ([FEMALE VICTIM'S NAME] [FEMALE MINOR'S INITIALS])'s breast, even if accomplished through the clothing;] or
   3. [took indecent liberties with ([VICTIM'S NAME] [MINOR'S INITIALS]);] or
   4. [caused a person to take indecent liberties with (DEFENDANT'S NAME) or another;] and
3. Without (VICTIM'S NAME)'s consent;
4. (DEFENDANT'S NAME) acted with intent, knowledge, or recklessness that (VICTIM'S NAME) did not consent; and
5. Did so with the intent to:
   1. [cause substantial emotional or bodily pain to any person;] or
   2. [arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person;] and
6. ([VICTIM'S NAME] [MINOR'S INITIALS]) was 14 years of age or older at the time of the conduct.

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1612 Sexual Abuse of a Child.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count__] with committing Sexual Abuse of a Child [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict [him][her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:
1. [touched the anus, buttocks, or genitals of (MINOR'S INITIALS), even if accomplished through clothing]; or
2. [touched (MINOR'S INITIALS)'s breast, even if accomplished through clothing]; or
3. [took indecent liberties with (MINOR'S INITIALS)]; or
4. [caused (MINOR'S INITIALS) to take indecent liberties with (DEFENDANT'S NAME) or another]; and

3. Did so with the intent to:
1. [cause substantial emotional or bodily pain to any person]; or
2. [arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person]; and

4. (MINOR'S INITIALS) was under 14 years old at the time of the conduct.

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1613 Aggravated Sexual Abuse of a Child.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) is charged [in Count__] with committing Aggravated Sexual Abuse of a Child [on or about DATE]. You cannot convict [him][her] of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

1. (DEFENDANT'S NAME);
2. Intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:
1. [touched the anus, buttocks, or genitals of (MINOR'S INITIALS), even if accomplished through clothing]; or
2. [touched (MINOR'S INITIALS)'s breast, even if accomplished through clothing]; or
3. [took indecent liberties with (MINOR'S INITIALS)]; or
4. [caused (MINOR'S INITIALS) to take indecent liberties with (DEFENDANT'S NAME) or another]; and

3. Did so with the intent to:
1. [cause substantial emotional or bodily pain to any person]; or
2. [arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person]; and

4. (MINOR'S INITIALS) was under 14 years old at the time of the offense; and
5. [You find that at least one of the following aggravating circumstances applies:]
1. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly [used a dangerous weapon] [used force, duress, violence, intimidation, coercion, menace, or threat of harm] [or committed the offense during the course of a kidnapping]];
2. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly caused bodily injury or severe psychological injury to (MINOR'S INITIALS) during or as a result of the offense];
3. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) was a stranger to (MINOR'S INITIALS) or made friends with (MINOR'S INITIALS) for the purpose of committing the offense];
4. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly [used or showed pornography] [caused (MINOR'S INITIALS) to be photographed in a lewd condition during the course of the offense]];
5. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) was convicted of a sexual offense prior to this trial];
6. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) committed a similar sexual act upon two or more victims at the same time or during the same course of conduct];
7. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) has committed six or more separate acts that would each constitute a sexual offense];
8. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) was in a position of special trust in relation to (MINOR'S INITIALS)];
9. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly encouraged, aided, allowed, or benefitted from [acts of prostitution or sexual acts by (MINOR'S INITIALS) with any other person, or sexual performance by (MINOR'S INITIALS) before any other person] [human trafficking, or human smuggling]]; or
10. [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly caused the penetration, however slight, of (MINOR'S INITIALS)'s genital or anal opening with any part of the human body other than the genitals or mouth].

After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1614 Aggravated Sexual Assault.

See Committee Note

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1615 Consent.

(DEFENDANT'S NAME) has been charged with (name of offense). The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] did not consent to the alleged sexual conduct.

Consent to any sexual act or prior consensual activity between or with any party does not necessarily constitute consent to any other sexual act. Consent may be initially given but may be withdrawn at any time before or during sexual activity.

The alleged sexual conduct is without consent of [(VICTIM'S NAME)] [(MINOR'S INITIALS)] under any, all, or a combination of the following circumstances:

• [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] expressed lack of consent through words or conduct;]
• [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) overcame [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] through the application of physical force or violence;]
• [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) overcame [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] through concealment or by the element of surprise;]
• [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) coerced [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] to submit by threatening immediate or future retaliation against [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] or any person, and [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] thought at the time that (DEFENDANT'S NAME) had the ability to carry out the threat;]
• [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) knew [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] was unconscious, unaware that the act was occurring, or was physically unable to resist;]
• [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) knew that as a result of mental illness or defect, or for any other reason [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] was incapable at the time of the act of either understanding the nature of the act or of resisting it;]
• [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) knew that [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] participated because [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] incorrectly believed that (DEFENDANT'S NAME) was someone else;]
• [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) intentionally impaired [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)]'s power to understand or control [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)]'s conduct by giving [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] a substance without [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)]'s knowledge;]
• [(MINOR'S INITIALS) was younger than 14 years old at the time of the act;]
• [At the time of the act, (MINOR'S INITIALS) was younger than 18 years old and (DEFENDANT'S NAME) was (MINOR'S INITIALS)'s parent, stepparent, adoptive parent, or legal guardian or occupied a position of special trust in relation to (MINOR'S INITIALS);]
• [(MINOR'S INITIALS) was 14 years old or older, but younger than 18 years old, and (DEFENDANT'S NAME) was more than three years older than (MINOR'S INITIALS) and enticed or coerced (MINOR'S INITIALS) to submit or participate, under circumstances not amounting to physical force or violence or the threat of retaliation;]
• [(DEFENDANT'S NAME) was a health professional or religious counselor who committed the act under the guise of providing professional diagnosis, counseling or treatment, and at the time of the act [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] reasonably believed the act was for professionally appropriate reasons, so that [(VICTIM'S NAME)][(MINOR'S INITIALS)] could not reasonably be expected to have expressed resistance.]

In deciding lack of consent, you are not limited to the circumstances listed above. You may also apply the common, ordinary meaning of consent to all of the facts and circumstances of this case.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1616A Conduct Sufficient to Constitute Sexual Intercourse for Unlawful Sexual Activity with a Minor, Unlawful Sexual Conduct with a 16 or 17 year old, or Rape.

You are instructed that any sexual penetration of the penis between the outer folds of the labia, however slight, is sufficient to constitute "sexual intercourse" for purposes of the offense of [Unlawful Sexual Activity with a Minor] [Unlawful Sexual Conduct with a 16 or 17 Year Old] [Rape].

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1616B Conduct Sufficient to Constitute Sexual Intercourse for Rape of a Child.

For purposes of Rape of a Child, sexual intercourse can be accomplished by any touching, however slight.

References

Committee Amended

CR1617 Sexual Offense Prior Conviction.

Having found (DEFENDANT'S NAME) guilty of [Rape][Rape of a Child][Object Rape][Object Rape of a Child][Forcible Sodomy][Sodomy on a Child][Aggravated Sexual Abuse of a Child][Aggravated Sexual Assault] [as charged in Count ____], you must now determine whether at the time (DEFENDANT'S NAME) committed this offense, [he][she] had been previously convicted of a grievous sexual offense.

"Grievous sexual offense" means [rape][rape of a child][object rape][object rape of a child][forcible sodomy][sodomy on a child][aggravated sexual abuse of a child][aggravated sexual assault], or any attempt to commit the offense.

The State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was previously convicted of a grievous sexual offense. Your decision must be unanimous and should be reflected on the special verdict form.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1618 Serious Bodily Injury.

If you find the defendant guilty of [Rape][Rape of a Child][Object Rape][Object Rape of a Child] [Sodomy][Sodomy on a Child][Forcible Sexual Abuse][Aggravated Sexual Abuse of a Child] [as charged in Count ____], you then must determine whether the defendant, in the course of committing [Rape][Rape of a Child][Object Rape][Object Rape of a Child][Sodomy][Sodomy on a Child][Forcible Sexual Abuse][Aggravated Sexual Abuse of a Child], caused serious bodily injury to another.

"Serious bodily injury" means bodily injury that creates or causes serious permanent disfigurement, protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ, or creates a substantial risk of death.

References

Committee Notes

Committee Amended

CR1701 Arson - Intent to Defraud Insurer-Utah Code Ann. sect. 76-6-102(1)(a).

     The defendant _____________ (NAME), is charged [in Count _____] with Arson on or about [DATE]. You cannot convict (him)(her) of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

     1.     That the defendant _____________(NAME),
     2.     intentionally and unlawfully,
     3.     damaged property,
     4.     with fire or explosives,
     5.     in order to defraud an insurer.

     After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that one or more of these elements has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

CR1702 Arson - Property of Another-Utah Code Ann. sect. 76-6-102(1)(b).

     The defendant _________________ (NAME), is charged [in Count _____] with Arson on or about [DATE]. You cannot convict (him)(her) of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

     1.     That the defendant _____________(NAME),
     2.     intentionally and unlawfully,
     3.     damaged property belonging to another,
     4.     with fire or explosives.

     After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that one or more of these elements has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

CR1703 Aggravated Arson-Utah Code Ann. sect. 76-6-103.

     The defendant _________________ (NAME), is charged [in Count _____] with Aggravated Arson on or about [DATE]. You cannot convict (him)(her) of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

     1.    That the defendant _____________(NAME),
     2.    intentionally and unlawfully,
     3.    damaged with fire or explosives,
     4.    (a)     a habitable structure, or
            (b)     a structure that contains a person who is not a participant in the offense, or
            (c)     a vehicle that contains a person who is not a participant in the offense.

     After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that one or more of these elements has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

CR1704 Reckless Burning-Utah Code Ann. sect. 76-6-104(1)(a).

     The defendant _________________ (NAME), is charged [in Count _____] with Reckless Burning on or about [DATE]. You cannot convict (him)(her) of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

     1.    That the defendant _____________(NAME),
     2.     recklessly,
     3.     started a fire or caused an explosion,
     4.     that endangered human life.

     After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that one or more of these elements has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

CR1705 Reckless Burning-Utah Code Ann. sect. 76-6-104(b).

     The defendant _________________ (NAME), is charged [in Count _____] with Reckless Burning on or about [DATE]. You cannot convict (him)(her) of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

     1.     That the defendant _____________ (NAME),
     2.     started a fire,
     3.     knew that it was spreading and would endanger the life or property of another, and
     4.     (a)     did not take reasonable measures to put out or control the fire, or
             (b)     did not give a prompt alarm.

     After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that one or more of these elements has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

CR1706 Reckless Burning-Utah Code Ann. sect. 76-6-104(c).

     The defendant _________________ (NAME), is charged [in Count _____] with Reckless Burning on or about [DATE]. You cannot convict (him)(her) of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

     1.     That the defendant _____________(NAME),
     2.     built or maintained a fire, and
     3.     did not take reasonable steps to remove all flammable materials surrounding the site as necessary to prevent the fire's spread or escape.

     After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that one or more of these elements has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

CR1707 Reckless Burning-Utah Code Ann. sect. 76-6-104(d).

     The defendant _________________ (NAME), is charged [in Count _____] with Reckless Burning on or about [DATE]. You cannot convict (him)(her) of this offense unless, based on the evidence, you find beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:

     1.    That the defendant _____________(NAME),
     2.     recklessly,
     3.     damaged the property of another,
     4.     with a fire or explosion.

     After you carefully consider all the evidence in this case, if you are convinced that each and every element has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant GUILTY. On the other hand, if you are not convinced that one or more of these elements has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant NOT GUILTY.

CR1708 Abandoned Fire-Utah Code Ann. sect. 76-6-104.5.

Tabled for further review.

CR2101 Definition of "Utter".

The word "utter" means any intentional act that puts a writing into circulation and implies, by word or action, that the writing is genuine.

The word "publish" or "publication" means any act by which the defendant shows or shares the writing with another person.

CR2102 Definition of "Writing".

Every forgery offense must involve a writing. A "writing" includes printing by hand or machine, electronic storage or transmission, or any other method of recording valuable information. Examples of writings include checks, credit cards, stocks, identification documents, etc. In this case the item(s) alleged to have been forged (is) (are)[insert applicable writing].

Committee Notes