Del. P.J.I. Crim. No. 5.35

DURESS

The defendant has asserted the affirmative defense of duress to [charge]. In

order to establish this affirmative defense, the defendant must prove two elements by a

preponderance of the evidence:

the defendant was coerced to engage in the conduct charged by the use of

force, or the threat of force, against the defendant or another person, and a reasonable

person in the defendant's situation would have been unable to resist; and

the defendant did not intentionally or recklessly place [himself/herself] in a

situation in which it was probable that the defendant would be subjected to duress.

The defendant has the burden of proving the affirmative defense of duress by a

preponderance of the evidence. The State has no burden to present any evidence on

this affirmative defense. If you find that this affirmative defense is established by a

preponderance of the evidence, you must return a verdict of not guilty.

Proof by a preponderance of the evidence means proof that something is more

likely than not. It means that certain evidence, when compared to the evidence

opposed to it, has the more convincing force and makes you believe that something

is more likely true than not. Preponderance of the evidence does not depend on the

number of witnesses. If the evidence supporting the defense is evenly balanced

against the State’s evidence, then the defendant has not proved the defense by a

preponderance of the evidence. The State has no burden to present any evidence on

this defense.

Even if the defendant has not met the burden of proving the affirmative defense

of duress, you must acquit the defendant if you find that the State has not met its

burden of proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt.