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

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

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

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

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).

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

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

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)

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

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.

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

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

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

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

AGGRAVATED CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONTACT N.J.S.A. 2C:14-3a [2C:14-2a(6)]

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

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'I. In the Matter of the Publication and Distribution of the Hawai'i Pattern Jury Instructions - Criminal

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

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CLAY COUNTY, LIBERTY, MISSOURI. Case No. Division

Title 17-A: MAINE CRIMINAL CODE

Section 5 Culpability and Mistake 173. Article 4. Sexual Offenses Section Sexual Assault in the First Degree

P.L. 1999, CHAPTER 95, approved May 3, 1999 Assembly, No (Second Reprint) AN ACT concerning grave robbing and amending [N.J.S.

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

Summer 2008 July 3, 2008 MID-TERM EXAM DO NOT GO BEYOND THIS PAGE UNTIL YOU ARE TOLD TO BEGIN.

Introduction to Criminal Law

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P : : : : : : : : :

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 117,138 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, RICARDO BERUMEN, Appellant.

APPENDIX E. MINORITY REPORT 7.7 Manslaughter

692 Part VI.b Excuse Defenses

New Hampshire Supreme Court October 17, 2013 Oral Argument Case Summary

(Committed on or after Nov. 1, 1998 for Vulnerable Elderly Person) (Committed on or after May 22, 2010 for Incompetent or Physically Disabled Person)

SC Amended Appendix A

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

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

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

Title 5 Traffic Code Chapter 2 Criminal Traffic Code

COMMONWEALTH OF PA : No. CR : vs. : : Petition for Habeas Corpus SHAWN RHINEHART, : RE: Counts 6 and 7 Defendant OPINION AND ORDER

TITLE 6A LUMMI NATION CODE OF LAWS CRIMINAL TRAFFIC CODE

TITLE 16 STREETS AND SIDEWALKS, ETC 1 CHAPTER 1 MISCELLANEOUS

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF PENNSYLVANIA SENATE BILL

New Hampshire Supreme Court October 13, 2016 Oral Argument Case Summary

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

FAILURE TO REGISTER AS A SEX OFFENDER (N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2a)

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P

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

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 117,102 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, DYLAN R. HARVEY, Appellant.

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. Nos. 118, ,440 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee,

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

2017 CO 76. No. 14SC517, Roberts v. People Affirmative Defenses Traverses Self-Defense Harassment.

Regulation of Solar Farms Local Law # This local Law shall be known as the Town of Groveland Regulation of Solar Farms Law

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P Appellant No WDA 2013

Summer 2010 July 17, 2010 MID-TERM EXAM DO NOT GO BEYOND THIS PAGE UNTIL YOU ARE TOLD TO BEGIN.

Case 4:04-cv GJQ Document 372 Filed 10/26/2006 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

I. Limits of Criminal law a. Due process b. Principle of legality c. Void for vagueness II. Mental State a. Traditional law i.

Title 4 Criminal Code Chapter 1 Preliminary Provisions

Homeowners Association Newsletter January 2011

BOARD POLICY. TEXAS BOARD Number: BPP-POL OF Date: October 16, PARDONS AND PAROLES Page: 1 of 11

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 4:16-cr WTM-GRS-1

BEING A BY-LAW to regulate Election Signs and to repeal By-law RE

Supreme Court of Florida

Closing Arguments. Jury Instructions:

Courthouse News Service

Supreme Court of Florida

AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ASSAULT IN THE COURSE OF A FELONY: CONSENT ALLEGED 1 N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2a(3) [READ COUNT OF INDICTMENT]

Fall 2011 October 26, 2011 (PRACTICE) MID-TERM EXAM DO NOT GO BEYOND THIS PAGE UNTIL YOU ARE TOLD TO BEGIN.

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

Criminal Law A Flowchart

Copyright Crash Data Services, LLC All rights reserved.

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 117,530 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, DYLLON ALAN TUCKER, Appellant.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF COBB COUNTY STATE OF GEORGIA. Defendant. STATE S REQUESTS TO CHARGE

Present: Carrico, C.J., Compton, Stephenson, Whiting, 1 Hassell, and Keenan, JJ.

HARLAN ANTHONY PHELPS, S/K/A HARLAN ANTHONY PHELPS, II OPINION BY JUSTICE S. BERNARD GOODWYN v. Record No January 11, 2008

TITLE 3 CRIMINAL CODE (As redesignated June 1, 1989) SUMMARY OF CONTENTS. 1. TABLE OF REVISIONS ii. 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS iii

DISTRICT OF CHETWYND BYLAW NO. 874, A bylaw to regulate or prohibit the making or causing of noises or sound in the municipality

DRAFT CHAPTER 94. CPJC 94.1 General Comments on Credit Card or Debit Card Abuse CPJC 94.2 Instruction Credit Card or Debit Card Abuse...

Section 9 Causation 291

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) For the CAL PARK HILL MULTI-USE PATHWAY. Between

Page 1 of 10 N.C.P.I. MOTOR VEHICLE TABLE OF CONTENTS MOTOR VEHICLE VOLUME REPLACEMENT JUNE 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE INTRODUCTION

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs July 8, 2014

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

Title 11 VEHICLES AND TRAFFIC. Chapter TRAFFIC CODE

NC General Statutes - Chapter 62 Article 15 1

Juvenile Scripts SCRIPT FOR DETENTION HEARING...2 SCRIPT FOR AN ADJUDICATION HEARING IN WHICH THE RESPONDENT PLEADS TRUE...7

For the purposes of this agreement, a person commits assault in the third degree if that person:

FEDERAL STATUTES. 10 USC 921 Article Larceny and wrongful appropriation

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE SUPREME COURT

Legal Definitions: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z A

Canadian Judicial Council Assaults and Other Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person (Last revised June 2013)

CHAPTER Committee Substitute for Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 512

76th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY Regular Session. Enrolled

Florida Jury Instructions. 7.2 MURDER FIRST DEGREE (1)(a), Fla. Stat.

LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR PRIVATE GRADE CROSSING

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

IC Chapter 4. Signals at Railroad Grade Crossings

3121. General prohibition on pen register and trap and trace device use; exception

CHAPTER 237. DEFINITIONS OF STATUTORY TERMS A. DEFINITIONS

APPENDIX A Leaving the Scene of a Crash Involving Death or Injury

Transcription:

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 in violation of a statute which provides as follows: Any person who [purposely] [knowingly] [recklessly] [defaces] [damages] [obstructs] [removes] [impairs] the operation of any railroad crossing warning signal or protection device, including, but not limited to [safety gates] [electric bell] [electric sign] [or any other alarm or protection system authorized by the Commissioner of Transportation, which is required under the provisions of [the law] 1 [or any other railroad property or equipment, other than administrative buildings, offices or equipment] shall be guilty of a crime... In order for the defendant to be found guilty of Vandalizing Railroad Crossing Devices, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) That the defendant [defaced] [damaged] [obstructed] [removed] [impaired the operation of] any railroad crossing warning signal or protection device, including, but not limited to [safety gates] [electric bell] [electric sign] [or any other alarm or protection system authorized by the Commissioner of Transportation, which is required under the provisions of [the law] 2 [any railroad property or equipment, other than administrative buildings, offices or equipment]; and (2) That the defendant acted purposely, knowingly or recklessly. The first element the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that the defendant [defaced] [damaged] [obstructed] [removed] [impaired the operation of] any railroad crossing, warning signal or protection device, including, but not limited to [safety gates] [electric bell] [electric sign] [or any other alarm or protection system authorized by the Commissioner of 1 2 See N.J.S.A. 48:12-54 or N.J.S.A. 48:2-29. See N.J.S.A. 48:12-54 or N.J.S.A. 48:2-29. Page 1 of 7

Transportation, which is required under the provisions of (the law) 3 ] [any railroad property or equipment, other than administrative buildings, offices or equipment.] The second element the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that the defendant acted [purposely] [knowingly] [recklessly]. [A person acts purposely with respect to the nature of his/her conduct or a result thereof if it is his/her conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result. A person acts purposely with respect to attendant circumstances if he/she is aware of the existence of such circumstances or believes or hopes that they exist. "With purpose," "designed," "with design," or equivalent terms have the same meaning. Purpose is a condition of the mind that cannot be seen and can only be determined by inferences drawn from the defendant's conduct, words or acts. It is not necessary for the State to prove the existence of such a mental state by direct evidence such as a statement by the defendant that he/she had a particular purpose. His/Her state of mind is to be determined by you after you examine his/her conduct and actions, all that was said or done at that particular time and place, and 3 The statute cites N.J.S.A. 48:12-54 or N.J.S.A. 48:2-29. N.J.S.A. 48:12-54 provides as follows: Protections at grade crossings; group signals Every company operating on a fixed track or tracks, freight or passenger trains or cars, shall provide protection to pedestrians and the traveling public at every crossing of its tracks by any public road. Such protection may be in the form of safety gates, flagmen, electric bell, electric signs or other recognized system of alarm or protection approved by the Board of Public Utility Commissioners. When several crossings lie so close together that an audible signal at one crossing may be sufficiently heard at others near it, such crossings may be protected by such device or signals as will sufficiently protect all crossings in the group. When on any line or part thereof all traffic is discontinued for any part of the night, no crossing guards need be operated while traffic is so discontinued. This section shall not apply to street car lines or tracks used principally for street car purposes. The provisions of this section shall be construed to be mandatory and shall be operative without order or direction of the board. N.J.S.A. 48:2-29 provides as follows: Protection at Grade Crossings Whenever it shall appear to the board that a public highway and a railroad or a street railway, or that a railroad and a street railway, cross one another at the same level and that conditions at such grade crossing make it necessary that gates be erected or that some other reasonable provision for the protection of the traveling public be adopted, the board may order the railroad or street railway company or both, to install such protective device or adopt such other reasonable provision for the protection of the traveling public at the crossing as in the discretion of the board shall be necessary. Page 2 of 7

all the surrounding circumstances. It is within the power of the jury to find that the proof of purpose has been furnished beyond a reasonable doubt by inferences which you may draw from the nature of the acts and circumstances surrounding the conduct of the defendant as they have been presented in the evidence you have heard and seen in this case.] OR [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 a high probability of their existence. A person acts knowingly with respect to a result of his/her conduct if he/she is aware that it is practically certain that his/her conduct will cause such a result. Knowledge is a condition of the mind that cannot be seen and can only be determined by inferences drawn from the defendant's conduct, words or acts. It is not necessary for the State to prove the existence of such a mental state by direct evidence such as a statement by the defendant that he/she had a particular knowledge. His/Her state of mind is to be determined by you after you examine his/her conduct and actions, all that was said or done at that particular time and place, and all the surrounding circumstances. It is within the power of the jury to find that the proof of knowledge has been furnished beyond a reasonable doubt by inferences which you may draw from the nature of the acts and circumstances surrounding the conduct of the defendant as they have been presented in the evidence you have heard and seen in this case.] OR [A person acts recklessly with respect to the nature of his/her conduct or a result thereof when he/she consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor s conduct and the circumstances known to him/her, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of Page 3 of 7

conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the actor s situation. 4 Recklessness is a state of mind which cannot be seen but can only be determined by drawing inferences from one's conduct, words or actions, and from all of the surrounding circumstances. It therefore is not necessary for the State to produce witnesses to testify that the defendant said he/she knew or believed that he/she was acting recklessly. His/Her state of mind is to be determined by you after you examine his/her conduct and actions, all that was said or done at that particular time and place, and all the surrounding circumstances. It is within the power of the jury to find that the proof of recklessness has been furnished beyond a reasonable doubt by inferences which you may draw from the nature of the acts and circumstances surrounding the conduct of the defendant as they have been presented in the evidence you have heard and seen in this case.] If the State has failed to prove any of the elements beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find the defendant not guilty of Vandalizing Railroad Crossing Devices. If the State has proven every element beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find the defendant guilty of Vandalizing Railroad Crossing Devices. GRADING [CHOOSE APPROPRIATE] If you find that the State has proven defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of this offense, then you must determine whether or not the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's [defacement] [damage] [obstruction] [removal] [impediment of] [the crossing warning signal] [the protection device] [the property] [the equipment] recklessly caused [death] [serious bodily injury] to another person. A person acts recklessly with respect to the nature of his/her conduct or a result thereof when he/she consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk. The risk must be of such a nature 4 See N.J.S.A. 2C:2-2b(3). Page 4 of 7

and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor s conduct and the circumstances known to him/her, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the actor s situation. 5 Recklessness is a state of mind which cannot be seen but can only be determined by drawing inferences from one's conduct, words or actions, and from all of the surrounding circumstances. It therefore is not necessary for the State to produce witnesses to testify that the defendant said he/she knew or believed that he/she was acting recklessly. His/Her state of mind is to be determined by you after you examine his/her conduct and actions, all that was said or done at that particular time and place, and all the surrounding circumstances. It is within the power of the jury to find that the proof of recklessness has been furnished beyond a reasonable doubt by inferences which you may draw from the nature of the acts and circumstances surrounding the conduct of the defendant as they have been presented in the evidence you have heard and seen in this case. "Serious bodily injury" means bodily injury which creates a substantial risk of death or which causes serious, permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ. 6 "Bodily injury" means physical pain, illness or any impairment of physical condition. 7 If you find that the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant recklessly caused [death] [serious bodily injury] to another person, then you must find him/her guilty of this form of Vandalizing Railroad Crossing Devices. If, on the other hand, you find that the State has failed to prove this element beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find him/her not guilty of this form of Vandalizing Railroad Crossing Devices. OR 5 6 See N.J.S.A. 2C:2-2b(3). N.J.S.A. 2C:11-1b. While the cited statute limits this definition to chapters 11 through 15, the definition appears appropriate here. 7 N.J.S.A. 2C:11-1a. While the cited statute limits this definition to chapters 11 through 15, this definition Page 5 of 7

If you find that the State has proven defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of this offense, then you must determine whether or not the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's [defacement] [damage] [obstruction] [removal] [impediment of] [the crossing warning signal] [the protection device] [the property] [the equipment] recklessly caused [bodily injury] [pecuniary loss of $2000 or more]. A person acts recklessly with respect to the nature of his/her conduct or a result thereof when he/she consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and purpose of the actor s conduct and the circumstances known to him/her, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the actor s situation. 8 Recklessness is a state of mind which cannot be seen but can only be determined by drawing inferences from one's conduct, words or actions, and from all of the surrounding circumstances. It therefore is not necessary for the State to produce witnesses to testify that the defendant said he/she knew or believed that he/she was acting recklessly. His/Her state of mind is to be determined by you after you examine his/her conduct and actions, all that was said or done at that particular time and place, and all the surrounding circumstances. It is within the power of the jury to find that the proof of recklessness has been furnished beyond a reasonable doubt by inferences which you may draw from the nature of the acts and circumstances surrounding the conduct of the defendant as they have been presented in the evidence you have heard and seen in this case. "Bodily injury" means physical pain, illness or any impairment of physical condition. 9 If you find that the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant recklessly caused [bodily injury to another person] [pecuniary loss of $2000 or more], then you must find appears appropriate here. 8 See N.J.S.A. 2C:2-2b(3). 9 N.J.S.A. 2C:11-1a. While the cited statute limits this definition to chapters 11 through 15, this definition appears appropriate here. Page 6 of 7

him/her guilty of this form of Vandalizing Railroad Crossing Devices. If, on the other hand, you find that the State has failed to prove this element beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find him/her not guilty of this form of Vandalizing Railroad Crossing Devices. [IF AN ACT OF GRAFFITI IS CHARGED] If you find that the State has proven defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of this offense, then you must determine whether or not the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's action(s) involved an act of graffiti. An "act of graffiti" means the drawing, painting or making of any mark or inscription on public or private real or personal property without the permission of the owner. If you find that the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's action(s) involved an act of graffiti, then you must find him/her guilty of this form of Vandalizing Railroad Crossing Devices. If, on the other hand, you find that the State has failed to prove this element beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find him/her not guilty of this form of Vandalizing Railroad Crossing Devices. 10 10 The court should utilize a special verdict sheet to ask the jury the amount of the pecuniary damage caused by the act of graffiti. Page 7 of 7