COLJI-Crim. H:11

The evidence presented in this case has raised the affirmative defense

of “defense of person,” as a defense to [insert name(s) of offense(s)].

The defendant was legally authorized to use physical force upon

another person without first retreating if:

1. he [she] used that physical force in order to defend himself

[herself] or a third person from what he [she] reasonably

believed to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical

force by that other person [or by persons acting in concert with

that other person], and

2. he [she] used a degree of force which he [she] reasonably

believed to be necessary for that purpose. [, and]

[3. he [she] did not, with intent to cause bodily injury or death to

another person, provoke the use of unlawful physical force by

that other person.]

[4. he [she] was not the initial aggressor, or, if he [she] was the

initial aggressor, he [she] had withdrawn from the encounter

and effectively communicated to the other person his [her]

intent to do so, and the other person nevertheless continued or

threatened the use of unlawful physical force.]

[5. the physical force involved was not the product of an

unauthorized combat by agreement.]

[6. the use of physical force against another was not based on the

discovery of, knowledge about, or potential disclosure of the

victim’s actual or perceived gender, gender identity, gender

expression, or sexual orientation, including but not limited to

under circumstances in which the victim made an unwanted

nonforcible romantic or sexual advance toward the defendant.]

The prosecution has the burden to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt,

that the defendant’s conduct was not legally authorized by this defense. In

order to meet this burden of proof, the prosecution must disprove, beyond

a reasonable doubt, at least one of the above numbered conditions.

After considering all the evidence, if you decide the prosecution has

failed to meet this burden of proof, then the prosecution has failed to prove

the defendant’s conduct was not legally authorized by this defense, which

is an essential element of [insert name(s) of offense(s)]. In that event, you

must return a verdict of not guilty of [that] [those] offense[s].

After considering all the evidence, if you decide the prosecution has

met this burden of proof, then the prosecution has proved the defendant’s

conduct was not legally authorized by this defense. In that event, your

verdict[s] concerning the charge[s] of [insert name(s) of offense(s)] must

depend upon your determination whether the prosecution has met its

burden of proof with respect to the remaining elements of [that] [those]

offense[s].