COLJI-Crim. H:61

The evidence presented in this case has raised the affirmative defense

of [“peace officer”] [“armed serviceperson”] [“licensed possession”], as a

defense to possessing [an illegal weapon] [a dangerous weapon].

The defendant’s conduct was legally authorized if:

[1. he she was a [peace officer] [member of the Armed Forces of

the United States] [member of the Colorado National Guard],

and

2. he [she] was acting in the lawful discharge of his [her] duties.]

[1. he [she] [had a valid permit and license for possession of such

weapon].

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 condition[s].

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 possessing [an illegal weapon] [a dangerous

weapon]. In that event, you must return a verdict of not guilty of

possessing [an illegal weapon] [a dangerous weapon].

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 concerning the charge of possessing [an illegal weapon] [a

dangerous weapon] must depend upon your determination whether the

prosecution has met its burden of proof with respect to the remaining

elements of that offense.