Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Collins

United States District Court, N.D. California

May 31, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
JAMEEL COLLINS, Defendant.

          JURY INSTRUCTIONS

         JURY INSTRUCTION No. 1

         DUTIES OF JURY TO FIND FACTS AND FOLLOW LAW

         Members of the jury, now that you have heard all the evidence, it is my duty to instruct you on the law that applies to this case. A copy of these instructions will be available in the jury room for you to consult.

         It is your duty to weigh and to evaluate all the evidence received in the case and, in that process, to decide the facts. It is also your duty to apply the law as I give it to you to the facts as you find them, whether you agree with the law or not. You must decide the case solely on the evidence and the law. Do not allow personal likes or dislikes, sympathy, prejudice, fear, or public opinion to influence you. You should also not be influenced by any person's race, color, religion, national ancestry, or gender. You will recall that you took an oath promising to do so at the beginning of the case.

         You must follow all these instructions and not single out some and ignore others; they are all important. Please do not read into these instructions or into anything I may have said or done any suggestion as to what verdict you should return-that is a matter entirely up to you.

         JURY INSTRUCTION No. 2

         CHARGE AGAINST DEFENDANT NOT EVIDENCE-PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE-

         BURDEN OF PROOF

         The indictment is not evidence. The defendant has pleaded not guilty to the charges. The defendant is presumed to be innocent unless and until the government proves the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In addition, the defendant does not have to testify or present any evidence to prove innocence. The defendant does not have to prove innocence; the government has the burden of proving every element of the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

         JURY INSTRUCTION No. 3

         DEFENDANT'S DECISION NOT TO TESTIFY

         A defendant in a criminal case has a constitutional right not to testify. In arriving at your verdict, the law prohibits you from considering in any manner that the defendant did not testify.

         JURY INSTRUCTION No. 4

         REASONABLE DOUBT-DEFINED

         Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced the defendant is guilty. It is not required that the government prove guilt beyond all possible doubt.

         A reasonable doubt is a doubt based upon reason and common sense and is not based purely on speculation. It may arise from a careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, or from lack of evidence.

         If after a careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, you are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty, it is your duty to find the defendant not guilty. On the other hand, if after a careful and impartial consideration of all the evidence, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty, it is your duty to find the defendant guilty.

         JURY INSTRUCTION No. 5

         ACTIVITIES NOT CHARGED

         You are here only to determine whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of the charges in the indictment. The defendant is not on trial for any conduct or offense not charged in the indictment.

         JURY INSTRUCTION No. 6

         SEPARATE CONSIDERATION OF MULTIPLE COUNTS-SINGLE DEFENDANT

         A separate crime is charged against the defendant in each count. You must decide each count separately. Your verdict on one count should not control your verdict on any other count.

         JURY INSTRUCTION No. 7

         STIPULATIONS OF FACT

         The parties have agreed to certain facts that have been stated to you. Those facts are now conclusively established.

         JURY INSTRUCTION No. 8

         OPINION EVIDENCE, EXPERT WITNESS

         You have heard testimony from Forensic Chemist Daniel Munoz of the Drug Enforcement Administration, Special Agent Kristen Larsen of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, Criminalist Rebecca Berlin of the San Mateo County Sheriff's Office Forensic Lab, and Special Agent Hilda "Heidi"Rubino of the Drug Enforcement Agency, who testified to opinions and reasons for these opinions. This opinion testimony is allowed because of the education or experience of these witnesses.

         Such opinion testimony should be judged like any other testimony. You may accept it or reject it, and give it as much weight as you think it deserves, considering the witness's education and experience, the reasons given for the opinion, and all the other evidence in the case.

         JURY INSTRUCTION No. 9

         COUNT ONE: POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE HEROIN (21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1))

         The defendant is charged in Count One of the indictment with possession with intent to distribute heroin. In order for the defendant to be found guilty of that charge, the government must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

         First, the defendant knowingly possessed heroin; and Second, the defendant possessed it with the intent ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.