Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 5.4-3

Note: The court should instruct the jury on the charged underlying arson prior to this

instruction.

The defendant is charged [in count __] with arson murder. The statute defining this offense

reads in pertinent part as follows:

a person is guilty of arson murder when, acting either alone or with one or more

persons, (he/she) commits arson and, in the course of such arson, causes the death of

a person.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements

beyond a reasonable doubt:

Element 1 - Committed arson

The first element is that the defendant, acting alone or with one or more other persons,

committed arson. Proof of this element will depend on your deliberations pertaining to count

<insert number of count charging arson> on which I have already instructed you. If you find the

defendant guilty of arson in count <insert number of count charging underlying arson>, then this

element of arson murder will be proven. If you find the defendant not guilty of arson, you must

also find the defendant not guilty of arson murder.

Element 2 - Caused the death of another person

The second element is that the actions of the defendant in committing the crime of arson were

the proximate cause of the death of <insert name of decedent>. You must find proved beyond a

reasonable doubt that <insert name of decedent> died as a result of the defendant’s actions. <See

Proximate Cause, Instruction 2.6-1.> It does not matter that the defendant did not intend to

cause the death.

Element 3 - In the course of committing arson

The third element is that the defendant caused the death of <insert name of decedent> while in

the course of the commission of the crime of arson. This means that the defendant’s acts causing

<insert name of decedent>’s death, or setting in motion the chain of events resulting in <insert

name of decedent>’s death, occurred during the commission of the arson and in the course of

carrying out its objective.

“In the course of the commission” of the arson means during any part of the defendant’s

participation in the arson; thus, the defendant’s acts causing the death of <insert name of

decedent> must have occurred somewhere within the time span of the occurrence of the facts

which constitute the arson. The phrase “in the course of the commission” is a time limitation and

means conduct occurring immediately before the commission of the arson, during the

commission of the arson, or in the immediate flight after the commission of the arson.

It does not matter that the defendant unintentionally or accidentally caused <insert name of

decedent>’s death, as long as (he/she) acted with the required mental state for committing arson.

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) the defendant, acting alone

or with one or more persons, committed the crime of arson, 2) the defendant caused the death of

<insert name of decedent>, and 3) the defendant caused the death of <insert name of decedent>

during the course of committing arson.

If you unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements

of the crime of arson murder, then you shall find the defendant guilty. On the other hand, if you

unanimously find that the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of the

elements, you shall then find the defendant not guilty.