Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 2.5-2

In weighing the testimony of an accomplice who is a self-confessed criminal, you should

consider that fact. It may be that you would not believe a person who has committed a crime as

readily as you would believe a person of good character. In weighing the testimony of an

accomplice who has not yet been sentenced or whose case has not yet been disposed of or who

has not been charged with offenses in which the state has evidence, you should keep in mind that

(he/she) may in (his/her) own mind be looking for some favorable treatment in the sentence or

disposition of (his/her) own case or hoping not to be arrested. Therefore, (he/she) may have such

an interest in the outcome of this case that (his/her) testimony may have been colored by that

fact. Therefore, you must look with particular care at the testimony of an accomplice and

scrutinize it very carefully before you accept it.

There are many offenses that are of such a character that the only persons capable of giving

useful testimony are those who are themselves implicated in the crime. It is for you to decide

what credibility you will give to a witness who has admitted (his/her) involvement and criminal

wrongdoing, whether you will believe or disbelieve the testimony of a person who by (his/her)

own admission has committed or contributed to the crime charged by the state here. Like all

other questions of credibility, this is a question you must decide based on all the evidence

presented to you.

1 This instruction is derived from State v. Marra, 222 Conn. 506, 524-25 (1992). It may be

inappropriate to include in the “accomplice testimony” instruction that “[e]ach accomplice’s

testimony is an admission by him against his own natural interest in not incriminating himself”

and therefore may be “evidence of his testimony’s reliability.” Id.