N.J. Model Criminal Jury Charge, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-7

Approved 1/6/92

DISTRIBUTING OR DISPENSING CONT ROLLED DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES

NEAR OR ON SCHOOL PROPERTY USED FOR SCHOOL PURPOSES

(N.J.S.A. 2C:35-7)

The defendant is charged with (distribut ing) (dispensing) a controlled dangerous

substance near or on school property, used for school purposes. The statute upon which this

charge is based reads, in its pertinent part, as follows:

Any person who violates [another sect ion of our law] by distributing or

dispensing a controlled dangerous substance [o r controlled substance

analog] while on any school property used for school purposes which is

owned by any elementary or secondary school or school board, or within

1,000 feet of any school property or school bus, or while on any school

bus, is guilty of a crime...

In order for you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the State must first prove

beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowi ngly or purposely distributed or dispensed a

controlled dangerous substance (or controlled substance analog). As I have previously instructed

you, the elements of distributing or dispensing a controlled dangerous substance are:

(1) S_______ is (insert appropriate contro lled dangerous substa nce or controlled

substance analog)

(2) That the defendant distributed S_______ on the date alleged in the indictment.

(3) That the defendant acted know ingly or purposely in doing so.

In addition to proving the distribution or di spensing, the State must also prove beyond a

reasonable doubt that this act occurred:

(CHARGE APPROPRIATE TERM)

on (or within 1,000 feet of) any school property

OR

on (or within 1,000 feet of) a school bus.

The term school property means any property which is used for school purposes and is

owned by or leased to an elementary school, secondary school or school board. 1 The 1,000 feet

1 Where there is a question whether the property wa s used for school purposes charge the following:

"In addition to determining whether property is school property, you must determine the purpose for which it is

used. You must decide whether the property is regularly, consistently, and actually used for school purposes, and

whether the property's appearance would give an objectively reasonable person reason to know that it was used

regularly, consistently, and actually for school purposes." State v. Ivory

, 124 N.J. 582, 587, 592 (1991).

DISTRIBUTION OR DISPENSING

CONTROLLED DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES

NEAR ON ON SCHOOL PROPERTY USED

FOR SCHOOL PURPOSES

(N.J.S.A. 2C:35-7)

zone extends from the outermost boundary of the school property and not from the school

building itself. It does not matter whether the school is public, private or parochial. It is also no

defense to this charge that no juveniles were present on the school property at the time of the

offense, or that the school was not in session.

The possibility that defendant may have b een unaware that the prohibited conduct took

place on or within 1,000 feet of school pr operty is not a defense to this crime 2 and shall not be

considered by you in your deliberations.

(CHARGE WHERE APPROPRIATE)

[It is affirmative defense that the crime t ook place entirely within a private residence.

This defense does not apply if any person 17 y ears or younger was present anywhere in the

residence at any time during the commission of th e offense or if the offense was committed for

profit. This defense must be proven by the defendant by a preponderance of the evidence.

Therefore, if you find that it is more likely than not that:

(1) The offense took place totally within a private residence; and

(2) no person 17 years of age or younger was present anywhere in the residence at

any time during the commission of the offense; and

(3) the offense was not committed for profit, then you must find the defendant not

guilty.

This defense applies only to this charge and shall not affect your verdict concerning any

other count of the indictment.]

If you find that the State has proven all these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, then

you must return a verdict of guilty. On the ot her hand, if you find that the State has failed to

prove any of these elements beyond a reasonabl e doubt, then you must return a verdict of not

guilty.

2 The statute eliminates this defens e only in cases involving school prop erty and does not eliminate such a

defense in cases in which the prohibited conduct occurred on or within 1,000 feet of a school bus.