NJ · jury_instructions
N.J. Model Criminal Jury Charge, N.J.S.A. Non 2C
Reasonable Doubt
Revised 2/24/97
REASONABLE DOUBT
The prosecution must prove its case by more than a mere preponderance of the evidence,
yet not necessarily to an absolute certainty.
The State has the burden of proving the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Some of you may have served as jurors in civil cases, where you were told that it is necessary to
prove only that a fact is more lik ely true than not true . In criminal cases, the State’s proof must
be more powerful than that. It must be beyond a reasonable doubt.
A reasonable doubt is an honest and reasonabl e uncertainty in your minds about the guilt
of the defendant after you have given full and impartial consideration to all of the evidence. A
reasonable doubt may arise from the evidence itself or from a lack of evidence. It is a doubt that
a reasonable person hearing the same evidence would have.
Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof, for ex ample, that leaves you firmly convinced
of the defendant's guilt. In this world, we know very few things with absolute certainty. In
criminal cases the law does not require proof that overcomes every possible doubt. If, based on
your consideration of the evidence, you are firmly convinced that the defendant is guilty of the
crime charged, you must find him/her guilty. If, on the other hand, you are not firmly convinced
of defendant's guilt, you must give defendant the benefit of the doubt and find him/her not guilty.
History
Revised 2/24/97
Provenance
- Source
- njcourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- 2026-08-20
- Content hash
517bd6ac434be1dc7c90084e9b7c78e6fdb93130a029f1df14ef69b66bcd3a90
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.