Alaska Criminal Pattern Jury Instruction 1.06

The fundamental obligation of jurors in a criminal trial is to apply the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. A defendant, although accused of a crime, begins trial with a clean slate – with no evidence favoring conviction. The presumption of innocence means that you must presume the defendant is innocent of the crime[s] charged. The presumption of innocence alone is sufficient for you to find a defendant not guilty. To overcome the presumption of innocence, the prosecution must prove every element of the crime[s] charged beyond a reasonable doubt.

This requirement that the prosecution must prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is called the burden of proof. The prosecution always has the burden of proving the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This burden never shifts throughout the trial. The defendant is not required to prove his or her innocence or to produce any evidence at all. Although a defendant is never required to produce any evidence, he or she may rely on evidence brought out through any witness, regardless of which party called the witness. A defendant has an absolute right not to testify. You must not draw any conclusion against the defendant if he or she does not testify.

What is a reasonable doubt? It is a doubt in your mind about the defendant’s guilt that arises from the evidence presented, or from a lack of evidence. A reasonable doubt is based on reason and common sense. A defendant must never be found guilty based on mere suspicion, speculation, or guesswork.

What is proof beyond a reasonable doubt? It is the highest level of proof in our legal system. It is not enough that you believe a defendant is probably or likely guilty or even that the evidence shows a strong probability of guilt; the law requires more. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that overcomes any reasonable doubt about the defendant’s guilt.

The prosecution is not required to prove guilt beyond all possible doubt, for it is rarely possible to prove anything to an absolute certainty. If, after careful and impartial consideration of the evidence and the law, you do not have a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant guilty. If, on the other hand, you think the prosecution did not prove every element of the offense charged beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant not guilty.