APPENDIX D. Filing # E-Filed 06/23/ :05:47 PM

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "APPENDIX D. Filing # E-Filed 06/23/ :05:47 PM"

Transcription

1 Filing # E-Filed 06/23/ :05:47 PM o APPENDIX D o o o o Q Committee on Standard Jury Instructions (Criminal) Honorable Jerri L. Collins, Chair Report

2 Search - 1 Result - AMCI 2d 6404 POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED OR COUNTER... Page 1 of 3 FOCuS442 Terms Search Within [Original Results (1-1) V (m Advanced... View Tutoria View Full V 1 of 1 Book Browse 2-64 Arkansas Model Jury Instructions - Criminal AMCI 2d Pages: (Copy w/ Cite) 2-64 Arkansas Madei Jury Instructions - Criminal AMCI 2d 6404 Arkansas Model Jury Instructions - Criminal Copyright 2014, Matthew Bender & Company, Inc., a member of the LexisNexis Group. CHAPTER 64 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES 2-64 Arkansas Model Jury Instructions - Criminal AMCI 2d 6404 Arkansas Model Jury Instructions - Criminal AMCI 2d 6404 AMCI2d 6404 POSSESSION OFACONTROLLED OR COUNTERFEITSUBSTANCE possessing (Defendant(s)) [is] [are] charged with the offense of [unlawfully ] (controlled substance) [possessing a counterfeit substance]. To sustain this charge the State must prove the following things beyond a reasonable doubt: First: That (defendant(s)) possessed [ (substance), a controlled substance;] [a counterfeit substance. A counterfeit substance is a non-controlled substance which (by overall dosage unit appearance including color, shape, size, markings, packaging and labeling) (or) (upon the basis of representations made to the recipient) purports to (be) (have the physical or psychological effect associated with) a controlled substance;] and Second: That [he] [they] did so [knowingly] [or] [purposely] [There are two kinds of possession, actual and constructive. Actual possession of a thing is direct physical control over it. Constructive possession exists when a person, although not in actual possession of a thing, has the right to control it and intends to do so, either directly or through another person or persons. (If two or more persons share actual or constructive possession of a thing, either [or both] may be found to be in possession.)] NOTE ON USE Use this instruction in conjunction with AMCI 2d 6404-D (except when the charge relates to a counterfeit substance), 8101, 8301-VF, and an appropriate Stage Two explanatory instruction and verdict form. If, under Ark. Code Ann , a defendant found guilty of a possession offense is alleged to have previously been convicted of a possession offense, then AMCI 2d 9201 or 9202 (depending on whether the previous conviction aliegation is disputed), appropriately modified, should be given in Stage Two along with an appropriate standard verdict form from Chapter 93. The bracketed paragraph will ordinarily be given only when constructive possession is an issue. rn=bc9a3cf7994b637e4bd7cd82035bd40e&c... 5/28/2015

3 6.06 POSSESSION A person is in possession of an object if the person knowingly procured or received the thing possessed or was aware of his/her control of it for a sufficient period to have terminated his/her possession. The law recognizes two kinds of possession: actual possession and constructive possession. A person who, although not in actual possession, knowingly has both the power and the intention, at a given time, to exercise dominion or control over a thing for a sufficient period to terminate his/her possession of it, either directly or through another person or persons, is then in constructive possession of it. The fact that a person is near an object or is present or associated with a person who controls an object, without more, is not sufficient to support a finding of possession. [The law recognizes also that possession may be sole or joint. If one person alone has actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is sole. If two or more persons share actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is joint.] The element of possession has been proved if you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had actual or constructive possession[, either solely or jointly with others]. Commentary Possession is a voluntary act only if the defendant knowingly procured or received the thing possessed or if the defendant was aware of the defendant's control of it for a sufficient period to have been able to terminate the defendant's possession. HRS 702- XC1v

4 ICJI 403 POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE INSTRUCTION NO. In order for the defendant to be guilty of Possession of a Controlled Substance, the state must prove each of the following: 1. On or about [date] 2. in the state of Idaho 3. the defendant [name] possessed any amount of [name of substance], and 4. the defendant either knew it was [name of substance] or believed it was a controlled substance. If any of the above has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find defendant not guilty. each of the above has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant guilty. Comment I.C /32(a). If the charge is possession of a controlled substance by an inmate, see ICJI 604. If the defendant is charged with "second offense" drug possession, I.C , that issue should be presented in a bifurcated proceeding. In State v. Fox, 124 Idaho 924, 866 P.2d 181 (1993), the Supreme Court held that I.C (c) does not set forth any mental state as an element of the crime of possession of a controlled substance. "Thus, as [this statute] does not expressly require any mental element and I.C only requires a general intent, we conclude that the offense only requires a general intent, that is, the knowledge that one is in possession of the substance." The Court held that the defendant's lack of knowledge that the substance was illegal (as a controlled substance) was irrelevant. In order to establish possession of a controlled substance, a defendant need not have actual physical possession of the substance; the state need only prove that the defendant had such dominion and control over the substance to establish

5 constructive possession. State v. Kopsa, 126 Idaho 512, 887 P.2d 57 (Ct. App. 1994). Constructive possession of a controlled substance exists where a nexus between the accused and the substance is sufficiently proven so as to give rise to the reasonable inference that the accused was not simply a bystander but, rather, had the power and intent to exercise dominion and control over the substance. State v. Rozajewski, 130 Idaho 644, 945 P.2d 1390 (Ct. App. 1997). Even trace or residual quantities of cocaine fall within the scope of I.C (c). State v. Groce, 133 Idaho 144, 983 P.2d 217 (Ct. App. 1999). The statute does not contain a mental element. The committee concluded, based upon State v. Lamphere, 130 Idaho 630, 945 P.2d 1 (1997), a mental element as set forth in element 4 should be included.

6 4 16 Possession [1] Possession may be actual or constructive. A person has actual possession when he has immediate and exclusive control over a thing. A person has constructive possession when he lacks actual possession of a thing but he has both the power and the intention to exercise control over a thing [either directly or through another person]. [2] If two or more persons share the immediate and exclusive control or share the intention and the power to exercise control over a thing, then each person has possession. Committec Note When there is no evidence that the possession was either constructive or joint, as, for example, when the substance or object was found on the defendant's person, it generally will be unnecessary to instruct the jury regarding the definition of possession. See People v. Rentsch, 167 Ill.App.3d 368, 521 N.E.2d 213, 118 Ill.Dec. 145 (2d Dist.1988). Give paragraph [1] only when there is an issue as to whether the defendant was in constructive possession. Give paragraph [2] only when there is an issue ofjoint possession. See People v. Pittman, 216 Ill.App.3d 598, 575 N.E.2d 967, 159 Ill.Dec. 160 (4th Dist.1991). Use applicable paragraphs and bracketed material when appropriate. The bracketed numbers are present solely for the guidance of court and counsel and should not be included in the instruction submitted to the jury. For an example of the use of this instruction, see Sample Set Section4, Page190f34

7 CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE #I One is guilty of the crime of possession of a controlled substance or of the crime of sale of a controlled substance if he or she commits the offense himself or herself, or if he or she acts as a principal in aiding abetting, counseling, commanding, inducing, encouraging, or procuring its commission. #2 Nevada Revised Statutes, Section provides that it is unlawful for any person to sell, exchange, barter, supply or give away a controlled substance. is a controlled substance. "3 The law recognizes two kinds of possession; actuai possession and constructive possession. A person who knowingly has direct physical control over a thing, at a given time, is then in actual possession of it. A person who, although not in actual possession, knowingly has the power and the intention at a given time to exercise dominion or control over a thing, either directly or through another person or persons, is then in constructive possession of it. The law recognizes also that possession may be sole or joint. If one person alone has actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is sale. If two or more persons share actual or constructive possession of a thing, their possession is joint. If you find liom the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused, either alone or jointly with others, had actual or constructive possession of the controlled substance described in the Information, then you may find that such controlled substance was in the possession of the accused within the meaning of the word "possession" as used in these instructions. "4 To constitute the illegal sale of a controlled substance, the acts of selling, exchanging, bartering, supplying, or giving away must be accompanied by knowledge on the part of thc accused of; 1. The presence of the drug, and; 2. Of its nature as a controlled substance. Unless such knowledge exists, the crime of illegal sale of a narcotic drug is not committed.

8 Revised 6/20/14 POSSESSI ON (N.J.S.A. 2C:2-1) To "possess" an item under the law, one must have a knowing, intentional control of that item accompanied by a knowledge of its character. So, a person who possesses an item such as ( IDENTIFY RELEVANT ITEM(S)) must know or be aware that he/she possesses it, and he/she must know what it is that he/she possesses or controls (that it is ). [WHERE APPLICABLE, charge: Possession cannot merely be a passing control, flecting or uncertain in its nature.] In other words, to "possess" an item, one must knowingly procure or receive an item or be aware of his/her control thereof for a sufficient period of time to have been able to relinquish his/her control if he/she chose to do so. The State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a possessor acted knowingly in possessing the item. A person acts knowingly with respect to the nature of his/her conduct or the attendant circumstances if he/she is aware that his/her conduct is of that nature, or that such circumstances exist, or he/she is aware of the high probability of their existence. A person acts knowingly as to a result of his/her conduct if he/she is aware that it is practically certain that the conduct will cause such a result. knowledge, or equivalent terms have the same meaning. Knowing, with Knowledge is a condition of the mind. It cannot be seen. It can only be determined by inferences from conduct, words or acts. Therefore, it is not necessary for the State to produce witnesses to testify that a particular defendant stated, for example, that he/she acted with knowledge when he/she had control over a particular thing. within your power to find that proof of knowledge has been furnished beyond a reasonable doubt by inference which may arise from the nature of the acts and the surrounding circumstances. A person may possess _ (an item) even though it was not physically on his/her person at the time of the arrest, if he/she had in fact, at some time prior to his/her arrest, had control over it. Possession means a conscious, knowing possession, either actual or constructive. [CIIARGE THOSE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPHS AS APPLY TO YOUR CASEJ It is Page 1 of 2

9 POSSESSION (N.J.S.A. 2 C:2-1) ACTUAL POSSESSION A person is in actual possession of an item when he/she first, knows what it is: that is, he/she has knowledge of its character, and second, knowingly has it on his/hcr person at a given time. CONSTRUCTIVE POSSESSION¹ Possession may be constructive instead of actual. As I just stated, a person who, with knowledge of its character, knowingly has direct physical control over an item at a given time is in actual possession of it. Constructive possession means possession in which the possessor does not physically have the item on his or her person but is aware that the item is present and is able to and has the intention to exercise control over it. So, someone who has knowledge of the character of an item and knowingly has both the power and the intention at a given time to exercise control over it, either directly or through another person or persons, is then in constructive possession of that item. JOINT POSSESSION Possession may be sole or joint. If one person alone has actual or constructive possession of an item, possession is sole. If two or more persons share actual or constructive knowing possession of an item, possession is joint. In State v. Spivev, 179 N.J. 229 (2004), the New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed a conviction under N.J.S.A. 2C:39-4.l(a), Possession of a Firearm While Committing Certain Drug Offenses. There, the Court noted that the statute suggests a temporal and spatial link between possession of the firearm and the drugs. The Court held: "The evidence must permit the jury to infer that the firearm was accessible for use in the commission of the [drug] crime." In the appropriate case, therefore, the possession charge may be supplemented by this language. Page 2 of 2

10 OSCN Found Document:Drug Possession Defined Page 1 of2 THE OKLAHOMA STATE COURTS NETWORK Home Courts Court Dockets Legal Research Calendar Help Brevlous Sectior I his Point in Indes :itationize 7EM IM Print Onh Oklahoma Jury instructions- Criminal UOklahoma Uniform Jury Instructions doklahoma Jury Instructions- Criminal dchapter 6 QA. DRUG OFFENSES Section OUJI-CR Drug Possession Defined Cite as: o.s., OUJI-CR 6-11 DRUG OFFENSES - DRUG POSSESSION DEFINED The law recognizes two kinds of possession, actual possession and constructive possession. A person who knowingly has direct physical control over a thing, at a given time, is then in actual possession of A person who, although not in actual possession, knowingly has the power and the intention at a given time to exercise dominion or control over a thing, is then in constructive possession of it. The possession prohibited by the law is not only that of actual physical custody of a controlled dangerous substance but also the constructive possession of it [The law recognizes that possession may be sole or joint. In other words, possession need not be exclusive. If one person alone has actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is sole. If two or more persons share actual or constructive possession of a thing, their possession is joint. A person may be deemed to be in joint possession of a controlled dangerous substance which is in the physical custody of an associate if he/she willfully and knowingly shares with that other person the right to control the disposition or use of such substance.] However, mere proximity to a substance is insufficient proof of possession. There must be additional evidence of the defendant's knowledge and control. Such knowledge and control may be established by circumstantial evidence. Each fact necessary to prove the guilt of the defendant must be established by the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. All of the facts and circumstances, taken together, must establish to your satisfaction the defendant's knowledge and control beyond a reasonable doubt. If you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant, either alone or jointly with another, had constructive possession of [Specify Controlled Dangerous Substance] then you may find that such substance was in the possession of the defendant within the meaning of the word "possession" as used in these instructions. Notes on Use This instruction should be used if there is evidence that the defendant had constructive, rather than actual, possession of a controlled dangerous substance. The fifth paragraph should be given only if there is evidence that the defendant had joint possession of the controlled dangerous substance. Committee Comments /28/2015

11 T.P.I. -- CRIM Page 1 of 3 T.P.I. -- CRIM SIMPLE POSSESSION OR CASUAL EXCHANGE Any person who commits the offense of [simple possession] [casual exchange] is guilty of a crime. For you to find the defendant guilty of this offense, the state must have proven beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the following essential elements:' (1) that the defendant either intentionally, knowingly or recklessly [possessed] [casually exchanged] a controlled substance; and (2) that the substance was (specify controlled substance) a controlled substance. is a Schedule controlled substance.2 [There are two types of possession recognized in the law: actual possession and constructive possession. A person who knowingly has direct physical control over an object at a given time is then in actual possession of it. A person who, although not in actual possession, knowingly has both the power and intention at any given time to exercise dominion and control over an object is then in constructive possession of it.]³ ["Possession" may be sole or joint. possession of a thing, possession is sole. If the person alone has actual or constructive If two (2) or more persons have actual or constructive possession of a thing, their possession is joint.]4 Crim/31.05.htm 5/28/2015

12 Page 1 of2 SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 CR40-l l l 05/05/06 POSSESSION OF COCAINE, 18 V.S.A. 4231(a)(1) The State has charged (Def) with possession of cocaine, as follows: [Read the charge.] Every crime is made up of essential elements. Before (Def) can be found guilty of the charge, the State must have proven each of the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt. In this case, the essential elements are that on the date and at the place alleged, (1) (Def) (2) possessed cocaine; and (3) [he] [she] did so knowingly and unlawfully. The first essential element is that (Def) is the person who committed the alleged acts. The second essential element is that (Def) possessed cocaine. A person possesses cocaine if he or she knowingly has direct physical control over it. In addition, a person possesses cocaine if he or she knowingly has the power and intent to exercise dominion or control over it, either directly or through another person. It does not matter whether the person possesses cocaine by himself or herself, or jointly with someone else. The term cocaine means coca leaves except coca leaves and extracts of coca leaves from which cocaine, ecgonine, and derivatives of ecgonine or their salts have been removed; cocaine, its salts, optical and geometric isomers, and salts of isomers; ecgonine, its derivatives, their salts, isomers, and salts of isomers; or any compound, mixture, or preparation which contains any quantity of cocaine. The last essential element is that (Def) possessed the cocaine knowingly and unlawfully. The word knowingly means that (Det) possessed the cocaine voluntarily and consciously, and not inadvertently, because of mistake, or by accident. The word unlawfully means that (Def) determining whether (Def) deliberately did something which the law forbids. In possessed cocaine knowingly and unlawfully, you should consider all of the surrounding facts and circumstances. 5/28/2015

13 Page 2 of 2 All of the elements of the offense must have been present at the same time. If the State has not proven each of the essential elements of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must fmd (Def) not guilty. However, if the State has proven all of the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you must return a verdict of guilty. 5/28/2015

14 Possession of a Controlled Substance, 21 U.S.C. 844 New: 10/23/06 [Defendant] is charged with possession of [controlled substance] on about [date]. It is against federal law to have [controlled substance] in your possession [without a valid prescription or order]. For you to find [defendant] guilty of this crime, you must be convinced that the government has proven each of these things beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that [defendant] on or about that date possessed [controlled substanec], either actually or constructively; Second, that (he/shc] did so knowingly and intentionally; and Third, that [he/she] did not possess the controlled substance pursuant to a valid prescription or order.] The word "knowingly" means that the act was done voluntarily and intentionally and not because of mistake or accident. The term "possess" means to exercise authority, dominion or control over something. recognizes different kinds of possession. The law ["Possession" includes both actual and constructive possession. A person who has direct physical control of something on or around his person is in actual possession ofit. A person who is not in actual possession, but who has both the power and the intention to exercise control over something is in constructive possession of it. Whenever I use the term "possession" in these instructions, I mean actual as well as constructive possession ["Possession" [also] includes both sole possession and.joint possession. If one person alone has actual or constructive possession, possession is sole. If two or more persons share actual or constructive possession, possession is joint. Whenever I have used the word "possession" in these instructions, I mean joint as well as sole possession.]

15 GENERAL AND PRELIMINARY INSTRUCTIONS POSSESSION Possession, as that term is used in this case, may be of two kinds: actual possession and/or constructive possession. A person who knowingly has direct physical control over a thing, at a given time, is in actual possession of it. A person who, although not in actual possession, knowingly has both the power and the intention, at a given time, to exercise dominion or control over a thing, either directly or through another person or persons, is in constructive possession of it. Possession may be sole or joint. If one person alone has actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is sole. If two or more persons share actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is joint. You may find that the element of possession is present if you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had actual or constructive possession, either alone or jointly with others. Note A number of Fifth Circuit cases continue to cite this instruction with approval. Soo United States v. Lewis, 265 F. App'x255, 257 (5th Cir. 2008); United States v. Horace, 227 F. App'x350, (5th Cir. 2007); United States v. Gross, 142 F. App'x 829, 830 (5th Cir. 2005); United States v. Bradford, 54 F. App'x 592, *3 (5th Cir. 2002); United States v. Cano-Guel, 167 F.3d 900, (5th Cir. 1999); United States v. Prudhome, 13 F.3d 147, (5th Cir. 1994). The instruction on actual or constructive possession can be given when the evidence supports a finding of actual and constructive possession.see United States v. Melancon, 662 F.3d 708, 713

16 Final Instructions: Definitions The law recognizes several kinds of possession. A person may have actual possession or constructive possession. A person may have sole or joint possession. A person who knowingly has direct physical control over a thing, at a given time, is then in actual possession of it. A person who, although not in actual possession, has both the power and the intention at a given time to exercise dominion or control over a thing, either directly or through another person or persons, is then in constructive possession of it. If one person alone has actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is sole. two or more persons share actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is joint. Whenever the word "possession" has been used in these instructions it includes actual as well as constructive possession and also sole as well as joint possession. Committee Comments See 1 A Kevin F. O'Malley, et al., FEDERAI. JURY PRACTICE AND INSTRUCTIONS, Criminal (5th ed. 2000); United States v. Smith, 104 F.3d 145, 148 n.2 (8th Cir. 1997); United States v. Ali, 63 F.3d 710 (8th Cir. 1995); United States v. Johnson, 857 F.2d 500, n.2 (8th Cir. 1988); United States v. Montgomery, 819 F.2d 847, 851 (8th Cir. 1987); Sewell v. United States, 406 F.2d 1289, 1293 n.3 (8th Cir. 1969). See also United States v. Henneberry, 719 F.2d 941, 945 (8th Cir. 1983) (definition of constructive possession). If 5 N 8.02

POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED DANGEROUS SUBSTANCE WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE 1 (BATH SALTS) 2 (N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5.3a)

POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED DANGEROUS SUBSTANCE WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE 1 (BATH SALTS) 2 (N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5.3a) Count POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED DANGEROUS SUBSTANCE WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE 1 2 of the indictment charges the defendant as follows: (Read Indictment) Approved 3/9/15 The pertinent part of the statute

More information

CERTAIN PERSONS NOT TO HAVE ANY WEAPONS 1 [N.J.S.A. 2C:39-7a]

CERTAIN PERSONS NOT TO HAVE ANY WEAPONS 1 [N.J.S.A. 2C:39-7a] Revised 6/13/05 CERTAIN PERSONS NOT TO 1 [] NOTE [The following should be charged before the beginning of the second trial if it is tried before the same jury that decided the possessory charge of a weapon

More information

UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED DANGEROUS SUBSTANCE (SYNTHETIC CANNABINOID) (N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5.3c) 1

UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF A CONTROLLED DANGEROUS SUBSTANCE (SYNTHETIC CANNABINOID) (N.J.S.A. 2C:35-5.3c) 1 Approved 2/13/17 UNLAWFUL POSSESSION OF A 1 Count of the indictment charges the defendant as follows: (Read Indictment) The pertinent part of the statute on which this indictment is based reads as follows:

More information

Revised 5/8/06. SIMPLE ASSAULT (Bodily Injury)(Lesser Included Offense) (N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1a(1))

Revised 5/8/06. SIMPLE ASSAULT (Bodily Injury)(Lesser Included Offense) (N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1a(1)) Revised 5/8/06 SIMPLE ASSAULT (Bodily Injury)(Lesser Included Offense) () The law requires that the Court instruct the jury with respect to possible (lesser) included offenses, even if they are not contained

More information

Case 1:13-cr DPW Document 240 Filed 06/09/14 Page 1 of 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:13-cr DPW Document 240 Filed 06/09/14 Page 1 of 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Case 1:13-cr-10238-DPW Document 240 Filed 06/09/14 Page 1 of 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) ) Crim. No. 13-10238-DPW AZAMAT TAZHAYAKOV ) ) Defendant

More information

VANDALIZING RAILROAD CROSSING DEVICES (N.J.S.A. 2C: ) Count of the indictment provides as follows: [READ COUNT OF THE INDICTMENT]

VANDALIZING RAILROAD CROSSING DEVICES (N.J.S.A. 2C: ) Count of the indictment provides as follows: [READ COUNT OF THE INDICTMENT] Approved 5/12/08 VANDALIZING RAILROAD CROSSING DEVICES Count of the indictment provides as follows: [READ COUNT OF THE INDICTMENT] This count charges the defendant with Vandalizing Railroad Crossing Devices

More information

STALKING (N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10b) (Cases arising after March 21, 2009)

STALKING (N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10b) (Cases arising after March 21, 2009) Approved 5/4/09 STALKING (Cases arising after March 21, 2009) Count of this indictment charges defendant with the crime of stalking. (Read Indictment) That section of our statutes provide, in pertinent

More information

STALKING. (N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10b) (Cases arising after March 21, 2009) of this indictment charges defendant with the crime of stalking.

STALKING. (N.J.S.A. 2C:12-10b) (Cases arising after March 21, 2009) of this indictment charges defendant with the crime of stalking. Revised 3/14/11 STALKING (Cases arising after March 21, 2009) Count of this indictment charges defendant with the crime of stalking. (Read Indictment) The applicable statute provides, in pertinent part,

More information

CORRUPTING OR INFLUENCING A JURY (N.J.S.A. 2C:29-8) 1

CORRUPTING OR INFLUENCING A JURY (N.J.S.A. 2C:29-8) 1 Revised 6/13/11 CORRUPTING OR INFLUENCING A JURY 1 The defendant is charged with the crime of corrupting or influencing a jury. The indictment reads in pertinent part as follows: (Read indictment) This

More information

HINDERING APPREHENSION OR PROSECUTION FOR TERRORISM (N.J.S.A. 2C:38-4)

HINDERING APPREHENSION OR PROSECUTION FOR TERRORISM (N.J.S.A. 2C:38-4) Approved 10/20/03 HINDERING APPREHENSION PROSECUTION F TERRISM () The defendant is charged with the crime of hindering apprehension or prosecution of another for the crime of terrorism, in that he/she

More information

Case 1:11-cr MJG Document 1 Filed 01/11/11 Page 1 of 15

Case 1:11-cr MJG Document 1 Filed 01/11/11 Page 1 of 15 Case 1:11-cr-00011-MJG Document 1 Filed 01/11/11 Page 1 of 15 Case 1:11-cr-00011-MJG Document 1 Filed 01/11/11 Page 2 of 15 Case 1:11-cr-00011-MJG Document 1 Filed 01/11/11 Page 3 of 15 Case 1:11-cr-00011-MJG

More information

Title 17-A: MAINE CRIMINAL CODE

Title 17-A: MAINE CRIMINAL CODE Title 17-A: MAINE CRIMINAL CODE Chapter 2: CRIMINAL LIABILITY; ELEMENTS OF CRIMES Table of Contents Part 1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES... Section 31. VOLUNTARY CONDUCT (REPEALED)... 3 Section 32. ELEMENTS OF CRIMES

More information

MURDER, PASSION/PROVOCATION AND AGGRAVATED/RECKLESS MANSLAUGHTER 1 N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3a(1) and (2); 2C:11-4a, b(1) and b(2)

MURDER, PASSION/PROVOCATION AND AGGRAVATED/RECKLESS MANSLAUGHTER 1 N.J.S.A. 2C:11-3a(1) and (2); 2C:11-4a, b(1) and b(2) Revised 6/8/15 MURDER, PASSION/PROVOCATION AND 1 Defendant is charged by indictment with the murder of (insert victim's name). Count of the indictment reads as follows: (Read pertinent count of indictment)

More information

ENDANGERING INJURED VICTIM (N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1.2)

ENDANGERING INJURED VICTIM (N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1.2) Revised 3/14/16 ENDANGERING INJURED VICTIM () (Defendant) is charged with endangering an injured person 1, (name), on (date). This conduct is prohibited by a statute providing: A person is guilty of endangering

More information

Case 5:14-cr M Document 27 Filed 05/04/15 Page 1 of 32 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

Case 5:14-cr M Document 27 Filed 05/04/15 Page 1 of 32 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA Case 5:14-cr-00318-M Document 27 Filed 05/04/15 Page 1 of 32 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) -vs- ) No. 5:14-cr-00318

More information

ENDANGERING THE WELFARE OF A CHILD (PORNOGRAPHY) (Applies to crimes committed after August 14, 2013) N.J.S.A. 2C:24-4b(5)(b)

ENDANGERING THE WELFARE OF A CHILD (PORNOGRAPHY) (Applies to crimes committed after August 14, 2013) N.J.S.A. 2C:24-4b(5)(b) ENDANGERING THE WELFARE OF A CHILD (PORNOGRAPHY) (Applies to crimes committed after August 14, 2013) Approved 9/8/14 child. Defendant is charged in count of the indictment with endangering the welfare

More information

BRIBERY IN OFFICIAL AND POLITICAL MATTERS (BRIBE RECIPIENT) (N.J.S.A. 2C:27-2) Count of the indictment charges defendant with the crime of bribery.

BRIBERY IN OFFICIAL AND POLITICAL MATTERS (BRIBE RECIPIENT) (N.J.S.A. 2C:27-2) Count of the indictment charges defendant with the crime of bribery. Revised 2/14/11 BRIBERY IN OFFICIAL AND POLITICAL MATTERS Count of the indictment charges defendant with the crime of bribery. [READ COUNT OF INDICTMENT] That statute reads in pertinent part as follows:

More information

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. Case No. 5D

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM v. Case No. 5D IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JULY TERM 2010 JOSHUA VAN ENS, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D09-1693 STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. / Opinion filed December 3, 2010 Appeal

More information

CAUSING OR RISKING WIDESPREAD INJURY OR DAMAGE (HAZARDOUS WASTE) N.J.S.A. 2C:17-2(a)(2).

CAUSING OR RISKING WIDESPREAD INJURY OR DAMAGE (HAZARDOUS WASTE) N.J.S.A. 2C:17-2(a)(2). OR DAMAGE (HAZARDOUS WASTE). Approved 04/18/05 Count of the indictment charges the defendant with causing widespread injury or damage in violation of a statute which provides as follows: A person...who,

More information

CAUSING OR RISKING WIDESPREAD INJURY OR DAMAGE (HAZARDOUS WASTE) N.J.S.A. 2C:17-2(a)(2)

CAUSING OR RISKING WIDESPREAD INJURY OR DAMAGE (HAZARDOUS WASTE) N.J.S.A. 2C:17-2(a)(2) OR DAMAGE (HAZARDOUS WASTE) Approved 4/18/05 Count of the indictment charges the defendant with causing widespread injury or damage in violation of a statute which provides as follows: A person...who,

More information

ATTEMPT (N.J.S.A. 2C:5-1) ALTERNATIVE I [To be used when defendant is charged with Attempt]

ATTEMPT (N.J.S.A. 2C:5-1) ALTERNATIVE I [To be used when defendant is charged with Attempt] Revised 6/15/09 ATTEMPT ALTERNATIVE I [To be used when defendant is charged with Attempt] The indictment charges that the defendant attempted to commit the crime of. ALTERNATIVE II [If the facts raise

More information

OBSCENITY FOR PERSONS UNDER 18 (ADMITTING TO EXHIBITION OF AN OBSCENE FILM) N.J.S.A. 2C:34-3c(2)

OBSCENITY FOR PERSONS UNDER 18 (ADMITTING TO EXHIBITION OF AN OBSCENE FILM) N.J.S.A. 2C:34-3c(2) Approved 4/12/10 OBSCENITY FOR PERSONS UNDER 18 Defendant is charged in count minor[s] to the exhibition of an obscene film. [READ COUNT OF INDICTMENT] of the indictment with admitting [a] The statute

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1387 United States of America, * * Plaintiff-Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Southern District of

More information

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT DIRECT CARE WORKER (ATTEMPTING TO CAUSE OR PURPOSELY, KNOWINGLY OR RECKLESSLY CAUSING BODILY INJURY) (N.J.S.A.

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT DIRECT CARE WORKER (ATTEMPTING TO CAUSE OR PURPOSELY, KNOWINGLY OR RECKLESSLY CAUSING BODILY INJURY) (N.J.S.A. Count AGGRAVATED ASSAULT DIRECT CARE WORKER (ATTEMPTING TO CAUSE OR PURPOSELY, KNOWINGLY OR RECKLESSLY CAUSING BODILY INJURY) () of this indictment charges the defendant with aggravated assault. (Read

More information

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE GENERAL ASPECTS OF CRIMINAL LAW. Name: Period: Row:

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE GENERAL ASPECTS OF CRIMINAL LAW. Name: Period: Row: ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE GENERAL ASPECTS OF CRIMINAL LAW Name: Period: Row: I. INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINAL LAW A. Understanding the complexities of criminal law 1. The justice system in the United States

More information

The defendant has been charged with second degree murder. 1. Under the law and the evidence in this case, it is your duty to return

The defendant has been charged with second degree murder. 1. Under the law and the evidence in this case, it is your duty to return PAGE 1 OF 14 NOTE WELL: If self-defense is at issue and the assault occurred in defendant s home, place of residence, workplace or motor vehicle, see N.C.P.I. Crim. 308.80, Defense of Habitation. The defendant

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) CRIMINAL NO GAO ) DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) CRIMINAL NO GAO ) DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV ) Case 1:13-cr-10200-GAO Document 1237 Filed 04/01/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) CRIMINAL NO. 13-10200-GAO ) DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV )

More information

The defendant has been charged with second degree murder. 1

The defendant has been charged with second degree murder. 1 Page 1 of 11 206.30 SECOND DEGREE MURDER WHERE A DEADLY WEAPON IS USED, COVERING ALL LESSER INCLUDED HOMICIDE OFFENSES AND SELF- DEFENSE. FELONY. NOTE WELL: If self-defense is at issue and the assault

More information

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT - SIGNIFICANT BODILY INJURY N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1b(7) 1

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT - SIGNIFICANT BODILY INJURY N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1b(7) 1 1 Revised 6/12/17 In Count of the Indictment, the defendant(s) is (are) charged with the crime of aggravated assault in that (he/she/they) allegedly on in the (Date) (Municipality) (READ PERTINENT LANGUAGE

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION Case 2:10-cr-00186-MHT-WC Document 1751 Filed 08/25/11 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) )

More information

Case 1:13-cr GAO Document 1232 Filed 04/02/15 Page 1 of 47 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

Case 1:13-cr GAO Document 1232 Filed 04/02/15 Page 1 of 47 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Case 1:13-cr-10200-GAO Document 1232 Filed 04/02/15 Page 1 of 47 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) v. ) CRIMINAL NO. 03-10200-GAO ) DZHOKHAR TSARNAEV

More information

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ana Dolores RUIZ, Jose Aviles, and William Perez, Defendants-Appellees. No.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ana Dolores RUIZ, Jose Aviles, and William Perez, Defendants-Appellees. No. Page 1 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Ana Dolores RUIZ, Jose Aviles, and William Perez, Defendants-Appellees. No. 93-2242 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT 59 F.3d

More information

I N T H E COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

I N T H E COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA MEMORANDUM DECISION Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION. Petitioner, Case No BC v. Honorable David M.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION. Petitioner, Case No BC v. Honorable David M. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION ERIC VIDEAU, Petitioner, Case No. 01-10353-BC v. Honorable David M. Lawson ROBERT KAPTURE, Respondent. / OPINION AND ORDER DENYING

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2010 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 3-29-2010 USA v. Eric Rojo Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 09-2294 Follow this and additional

More information

SENATE, No. 291 STATE OF NEW JERSEY. 218th LEGISLATURE PRE-FILED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 2018 SESSION

SENATE, No. 291 STATE OF NEW JERSEY. 218th LEGISLATURE PRE-FILED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 2018 SESSION SENATE, No. STATE OF NEW JERSEY th LEGISLATURE PRE-FILED FOR INTRODUCTION IN THE 0 SESSION Sponsored by: Senator JAMES W. HOLZAPFEL District 0 (Ocean) Co-Sponsored by: Senators Pennacchio and Corrado SYNOPSIS

More information

COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT. The STATE OF OHIO, : : Appellee, : : JOURNAL ENTRY : v. : and : : OPINION JORDAN, : : Appellant.

COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT. The STATE OF OHIO, : : Appellee, : : JOURNAL ENTRY : v. : and : : OPINION JORDAN, : : Appellant. [Cite as State v. Jordan, 168 Ohio App.3d 202, 2006-Ohio-538.] COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO, EIGHTH DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA NO. 85817 The STATE OF OHIO, Appellee, JOURNAL ENTRY v. and OPINION JORDAN, Appellant.

More information

OBSCENITY FOR PERSONS UNDER 18 (ADMITTING TO EXHIBITION OF AN OBSCENE FILM) N.J.S.A. 2C:34-3c(1)

OBSCENITY FOR PERSONS UNDER 18 (ADMITTING TO EXHIBITION OF AN OBSCENE FILM) N.J.S.A. 2C:34-3c(1) Defendant is charged in count exhibition of an obscene film. Page 1 of 5 Approved 4/12/10 of the indictment with admitting [a] minor[s] to the [READ COUNT OF INDICTMENT] The statute under which this charge

More information

Cite as 2018 Ark. App. 435 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV

Cite as 2018 Ark. App. 435 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV Cite as 2018 Ark. App. 435 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION IV No. CR-18-50 CALVIN WALLACE TERRY APPELLANT V. STATE OF ARKANSAS APPELLEE Opinion Delivered: September 26, 2018 APPEAL FROM THE PULASKI

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA Pursuant to Ind. Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral

More information

Rule 404(B) and Reversal on Appeal

Rule 404(B) and Reversal on Appeal GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works Faculty Scholarship 2008 Rule 404(B) and Reversal on Appeal Stephen A. Saltzburg George Washington University Law School, SSALTZ@law.gwu.edu Follow this and additional

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION. v. CASE NO. 6:18-cr-43-Orl-37DCI JOINTLY PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION. v. CASE NO. 6:18-cr-43-Orl-37DCI JOINTLY PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS Case 6:18-cr-00043-RBD-DCI Document 51 Filed 08/13/18 Page 1 of 34 PageID 307 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CASE NO. 6:18-cr-43-Orl-37DCI

More information

RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT CASES

RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT CASES RECENT THIRD CIRCUIT AND SUPREME COURT CASES March 6, 2013 Christofer Bates, EDPA SUPREME COURT I. Aiding and Abetting / Accomplice Liability / 924(c) Rosemond v. United States, --- U.S. ---, 2014 WL 839184

More information

PART C IMPRISONMENT. If the applicable guideline range is in Zone B of the Sentencing Table, the minimum term may be satisfied by

PART C IMPRISONMENT. If the applicable guideline range is in Zone B of the Sentencing Table, the minimum term may be satisfied by 5C1.1 PART C IMPRISONMENT 5C1.1. Imposition of a Term of Imprisonment (a) A sentence conforms with the guidelines for imprisonment if it is within the minimum and maximum terms of the applicable guideline

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Case: 13-11396 Document: 00512881175 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/23/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Summary Calendar Plaintiff-Appellee United States

More information

In the event you find (have found) the defendant guilty of (name offense), you must then consider and answer the following question:

In the event you find (have found) the defendant guilty of (name offense), you must then consider and answer the following question: Page 1 of 10 204.25. (This document includes a sample verdict sheet. See Instruction References.) NOTE WELL: Other than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond

More information

SENATE ENROLLED ACT No. 52

SENATE ENROLLED ACT No. 52 Second Regular Session 120th General Assembly (2018) PRINTING CODE. Amendments: Whenever an existing statute (or a section of the Indiana Constitution) is being amended, the text of the existing provision

More information

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 15 3313 cr United States v. Smith In the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit AUGUST TERM 2016 No. 15 3313 cr UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. EDWARD SMITH, Defendant Appellant.

More information

RACKETEERING 1 (N.J.S.A. 2C:41-2c)

RACKETEERING 1 (N.J.S.A. 2C:41-2c) Approved 2/14/11 RACKETEERING 1 Count of the indictment charges defendant with racketeering. [READ COUNT OF INDICTMENT] That section of our statutes provides in pertinent part: It is unlawful for any person

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI ST. JOSEPH DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI ST. JOSEPH DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI ST. JOSEPH DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. No. 09-00121-01-CR-SJ-DGK GILBERTO LARA-RUIZ, a/k/a HILL Defendant.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL ACTION. v. : NO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL ACTION. v. : NO Case 1:06-cr-00125-SLR Document 67 Filed 03/03/2008 Page 1 of 13 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : CRIMINAL ACTION v. : NO. 06-125 TERESA FLOOD

More information

G.S. 15A Page 1

G.S. 15A Page 1 15A-1340.16. Aggravated and mitigated sentences. (a) Generally, Burden of Proof. The court shall consider evidence of aggravating or mitigating factors present in the offense that make an aggravated or

More information

Packet Two: Criminal Law and Procedure Chapter 1: Background

Packet Two: Criminal Law and Procedure Chapter 1: Background Packet Two: Criminal Law and Procedure Chapter 1: Background Review from Introduction to Law The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land. The United States Supreme Court is the final

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2014 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 2-23-2014 USA v. Haki Whaley Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket 13-1943 Follow this and additional

More information

SUBSTANTIVE JURY INSTRUCTIONS United States v. W. Carl Reichel No. 15-cr DPW. This case started with this document, the Indictment.

SUBSTANTIVE JURY INSTRUCTIONS United States v. W. Carl Reichel No. 15-cr DPW. This case started with this document, the Indictment. Case 1:15-cr-10324-DPW Document 244 Filed 06/17/16 Page 1 of 13 SUBSTANTIVE JURY INSTRUCTIONS United States v. W. Carl Reichel No. 15-cr-10324-DPW This case started with this document, the Indictment.

More information

COURT OF APPEALS THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT MARION COUNTY PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE CASE NUMBER

COURT OF APPEALS THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT MARION COUNTY PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE CASE NUMBER COURT OF APPEALS THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT MARION COUNTY STATE OF OHIO PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE CASE NUMBER 9-99-57 v. CASSANDRA N. MCKEE O P I N I O N DEFENDANT-APPELLANT CHARACTER OF PROCEEDINGS: Criminal Appeal

More information

Motion for Rehearing Denied October 23, 1981 COUNSEL

Motion for Rehearing Denied October 23, 1981 COUNSEL 1 STATE V. CHOUINARD, 1981-NMSC-096, 96 N.M. 658, 634 P.2d 680 (S. Ct. 1981) STATE OF NEW MEXICO, Plaintiff-Petitioner, vs. MARK ALLEN CHOUINARD, Defendant-Respondent No. 13423 SUPREME COURT OF NEW MEXICO

More information

Follow this and additional works at: Part of the Administrative Law Commons

Follow this and additional works at:   Part of the Administrative Law Commons University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Department of State, Opinions from the Administrative Procedures Division Law 8-21-2006 DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY,

More information

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT KA MICHAEL CHARLES MAGDALENO **********

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT KA MICHAEL CHARLES MAGDALENO ********** STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT KA 03-618 STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS MICHAEL CHARLES MAGDALENO ********** APPEAL FROM THE NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF RAPIDES, NO. 263,233 HONORABLE

More information

Case 0:13-cr KAM Document 76 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2014 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 0:13-cr KAM Document 76 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2014 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case 0:13-cr-60245-KAM Document 76 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/19/2014 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. 13-60245-CR-MARRA(s) v. Plaintiff,

More information

v No Branch Circuit Court

v No Branch Circuit Court S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N C O U R T O F A P P E A L S PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED August 15, 2017 v No. 332955 Branch Circuit Court DOUGLAS EUGENE HUEY, LC No.

More information

PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT

PUBLISH UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit July 7, 2015 PUBLISH Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff S Appellee,

More information

MODEL CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS COMMITTEE REPORTER S ONLINE UPDATE. Updated September 3, Introduction

MODEL CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS COMMITTEE REPORTER S ONLINE UPDATE. Updated September 3, Introduction MODEL CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS COMMITTEE REPORTER S ONLINE UPDATE Updated September 3, 2014 Introduction The Committee intends to keep COLJI-Crim. (2014) current by periodically publishing new editions

More information

State Ephedrine and Pseudoephedrine Single Over-The- Counter Transaction Limits

State Ephedrine and Pseudoephedrine Single Over-The- Counter Transaction Limits 1 State Ephedrine and Pseudoephedrine Single Over-The- Counter Transaction Limits This project was supported by Cooperative Agreement No. 2012-DC-BX-K002 awarded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The

More information

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT In Case No. 2017-0439, State of New Hampshire v. Cesar Abreu, the court on November 15, 2018, issued the following order: The defendant, Cesar Abreu, appeals his

More information

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT

STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT STATE OF LOUISIANA VERSUS DONNA FAYE CHAISSON STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL, THIRD CIRCUIT 11-1135 ********** APPEAL FROM THE THIRTY-FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF JEFFERSON DAVIS, DOCKET

More information

S U P P L E M E N T No. 2 TO THE SOVEREIGN BASE AREAS GAZETTE No of 13th October 2006 L E G I S L A T I O N

S U P P L E M E N T No. 2 TO THE SOVEREIGN BASE AREAS GAZETTE No of 13th October 2006 L E G I S L A T I O N S U P P L E M E N T No. 2 TO THE SOVEREIGN BASE AREAS GAZETTE No. 1431 of 13th October 2006 L E G I S L A T I O N THE NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES (CONSOLIDATION) ORDINANCE 2006 ARRANGEMENT

More information

Case 1:18-cv RBK-AMD Document 1 Filed 07/02/18 Page 1 of 16 PageID: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Case 1:18-cv RBK-AMD Document 1 Filed 07/02/18 Page 1 of 16 PageID: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY Case 1:18-cv-11321-RBK-AMD Document 1 Filed 07/02/18 Page 1 of 16 PageID: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY : ISREL DILLARD, both individually : and on behalf of a class of others similarly

More information

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED June 27, 2017 v No. 332149 Kalamazoo Circuit Court SAMMIE BEN GRAY, LC No. 2015-001388-FH Defendant-Appellant.

More information

STIPULATED JURY INSTRUCTIONS State v. Manny Rayfield Curr County Circuit Court Case No State of New Maine

STIPULATED JURY INSTRUCTIONS State v. Manny Rayfield Curr County Circuit Court Case No State of New Maine STIPULATED JURY INSTRUCTIONS State v. Manny Rayfield Curr County Circuit Court Case No. 09-3031 State of New Maine Instruction Number Instruction Description 1. Preliminary Instructions 2. Functions of

More information

UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2014 ANDREA SHERON HARPS STATE OF MARYLAND

UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2014 ANDREA SHERON HARPS STATE OF MARYLAND UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 1957 September Term, 2014 ANDREA SHERON HARPS v. STATE OF MARYLAND Eyler, Deborah S., Hotten, Nazarian, JJ. Opinion by Eyler, Deborah S., J. Filed:

More information

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NUMBER HINDS COUNTY DRUG COURT PROBATION PROGRAM

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI CAUSE NUMBER HINDS COUNTY DRUG COURT PROBATION PROGRAM STATE OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HINDS COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI VS. CAUSE NUMBER HINDS COUNTY DRUG COURT PROBATION PROGRAM Defendant s Contract of Participation I,,

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2011 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 7-28-2011 USA v. Kevin Felder Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 09-1567 Follow this and additional

More information

NO. CAAP IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

NO. CAAP IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I NO. CAAP-14-0001047 IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I STATE OF HAWAI'I, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CHARLES L. BOVEE, Defendant-Appellant, and ADAM J. APILADO, Defendant-Appellee

More information

[Cite as State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 107, 2010-Ohio-6301.]

[Cite as State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 107, 2010-Ohio-6301.] [Cite as State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 107, 2010-Ohio-6301.] THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT, v. JOHNSON, APPELLEE. [Cite as State v. Johnson, 128 Ohio St.3d 107, 2010-Ohio-6301.] Criminal law R.C. 2901.21

More information

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No US v. Debon Sims, Jr. Doc. 406483749 Appeal: 16-4266 Doc: 46 Filed: 04/17/2017 Pg: 1 of 6 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-4266 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

More information

PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Post Office Box 40 BRIAN T. WALTZ West Jefferson, Ohio ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR 20 South Second Street Newark, Ohio 43055

PROSECUTING ATTORNEY Post Office Box 40 BRIAN T. WALTZ West Jefferson, Ohio ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR 20 South Second Street Newark, Ohio 43055 [Cite as State v. Molla, 2008-Ohio-5331.] COURT OF APPEALS LICKING COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT STATE OF OHIO Plaintiff-Appellee -vs- ACHENAFI T. MOLLA Defendant-Appellant JUDGES: Hon. John W.

More information

DWI Marijuana: Prosecution & Defense

DWI Marijuana: Prosecution & Defense Garden State CLE presents: DWI Marijuana: Prosecution & Defense Lesson Plan Table of Contents Part I Elements of offense under NJSA 39:4-50(a) Part II - Holdings of the Supreme Court in Bealor: Part III

More information

TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * On October 20, 2006, Jonearl B. Smith was charged by complaint with

TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * On October 20, 2006, Jonearl B. Smith was charged by complaint with FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS December 23, 2011 TENTH CIRCUIT Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff - Appellee,

More information

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2005 SESSION LAW HOUSE BILL 822

GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2005 SESSION LAW HOUSE BILL 822 GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NORTH CAROLINA SESSION 2005 SESSION LAW 2005-145 HOUSE BILL 822 AN ACT TO AMEND STATE LAW REGARDING THE DETERMINATION OF AGGRAVATING FACTORS IN A CRIMINAL CASE TO CONFORM WITH THE UNITED

More information

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and A. Victoria Wiggins, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and A. Victoria Wiggins, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. LINDSEY RENE TEMPLE, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF

More information

Introduction to Criminal Law

Introduction to Criminal Law Winter 2019 Introduction to Criminal Law Recognizing Offenses Shoplifting equals Larceny Criminal possession of stolen property. Punching someone might be Assault; or Harassment; or Menacing Recognizing

More information

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON JULY, 1998 SESSION. November 9, 1998 STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) No. 02C CR-00252

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON JULY, 1998 SESSION. November 9, 1998 STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) No. 02C CR-00252 IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON JULY, 1998 SESSION FILED November 9, 1998 STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) No. 02C01-9707-CR-00252 Appellee ) Cecil Crowson, Jr. ) Appellate Court Clerk )

More information

75th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Regular Session

75th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Regular Session th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--00 Regular Session House Bill Ordered printed by the Speaker pursuant to House Rule.00A (). Presession filed (at the request of House Interim Committee on Judiciary for

More information

CHAPTER 6 INCEST, CHILD ABUSE AND WRONGS TO CHILDREN

CHAPTER 6 INCEST, CHILD ABUSE AND WRONGS TO CHILDREN CHAPTER 6 INCEST, CHILD ABUSE AND WRONGS TO CHILDREN 6:01 INCEST 6:02 INCEST (STEPCHILD OR CHILD BY ADOPTION, OVER TWENTY-ONE) 6:03 AGGRAVATED INCEST 6:04 CHILD ABUSE (KNOWING OR RECKLESS) 6:05 CHILD ABUSE

More information

POSSESSION OF AN ASSAULT FIREARM (N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5f)

POSSESSION OF AN ASSAULT FIREARM (N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5f) Revised 10/6/14 POSSESSION OF AN ASSAULT FIREARM Defendant(s),, is/are charged in count with unlawful possession of an assault firearm. The pertinent language of the statute reads as follows: Any person

More information

SCMF IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I

SCMF IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCMF-11-0000315 18-DEC-2014 09:15 AM SCMF-11-0000315 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I In the Matter of the Publication and Distribution of the Hawai'i Pattern

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI. Cause No KA KIMBERLY ANN WHITEHEAD, Appellant. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI. Cause No KA KIMBERLY ANN WHITEHEAD, Appellant. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee E-Filed Document May 1 2015 11:58:24 2014-KA-00697 Pages: 18 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI Cause No. 2014-KA-00697 KIMBERLY ANN WHITEHEAD, Appellant v. STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, Appellee APPEAL FROM

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA Case 4:10-cr-00194-JHP Document 40 Filed in USDC ND/OK on 03/16/11 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v.

More information

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. File Name: 07a0786n.06. Filed: November 8, Nos and

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION. File Name: 07a0786n.06. Filed: November 8, Nos and NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 07a0786n.06 Filed: November 8, 2007 Nos. 06-5381 and 06-5382 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT VINCENT ZIRKER and ROOSEVELT PITTS,

More information

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont NO. 09-10-00050-CR CARTER PEYTON MEYER, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 284th District Court Montgomery County,

More information

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF WAYNE ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY INTRODUCTION

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF WAYNE ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY INTRODUCTION [Cite as State v. Peek, 2011-Ohio-3624.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF WAYNE ) STATE OF OHIO Appellee C.A. No. 10CA0040 v. LARRY E. PEEK Appellant APPEAL

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2006 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 7-11-2006 USA v. Severino Precedential or Non-Precedential: Precedential Docket No. 05-3695 Follow this and additional

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2003 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 9-30-2003 USA v. Holland Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 02-4481 Follow this and additional

More information

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: KIMBERLY A. JACKSON Indianapolis, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: STEVE CARTER Attorney General of Indiana MATTHEW D. FISHER Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis,

More information

Jeffrey V. Hill Bodyfelt Mount LLP 707 Southwest Washington St. Suite 1100 Portland, Oregon (503)

Jeffrey V. Hill Bodyfelt Mount LLP 707 Southwest Washington St. Suite 1100 Portland, Oregon (503) Jeffrey V. Hill Bodyfelt Mount LLP 707 Southwest Washington St. Suite 1100 Portland, Oregon 97205 (503) 243-1022 hill@bodyfeltmount.com LIQUOR LIABILITY I. Introduction Liquor Liability the notion of holding

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA EASTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA EASTERN DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, vs. SCOTT MICHAEL HARRY, Defendant. No. CR17-1017-LTS SENTENCING OPINION AND

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2014 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 10-16-2014 USA v. David Garcia Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 10-4419 Follow this and

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION PLEA AGREEMENT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION PLEA AGREEMENT UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CORNELIS JAN SLOMP, A/K/A SUPERTRIPS No. 13 CR 689 Judge Matthew F. Kennelly PLEA AGREEMENT 1. This

More information

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT,

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT, [Cite as State v. Brady, 119 Ohio St.3d 375, 2008-Ohio-4493.] THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLANT, v. BRADY, APPELLEE. [Cite as State v. Brady, 119 Ohio St.3d 375, 2008-Ohio-4493.] Trial court erred in dismissing

More information