NJ · jury_instructions
N.J. Model Criminal Jury Charge, N.J.S.A. Non 2C
Witness - Failure of the State to Produce
Revised 6/14/10
WITNESS - FAILURE OF THE STATE TO PRODUCE1
During the course of this trial, re ference has been m ade to___________(NAME OF
PERSON) as a witness in this matter (as having information relevant to the matter before you) and
that the State has failed to call (him/her) to testify. If you find that ___________ (NAME OF
PERSON) is a person whom you would naturally expect the State to produce to testify, you have a
right to infer from the non-production of this witness that (his/her) testimony would be adverse to
the interest of the State.
The basis for this rule is that where the State fails to produce a witness who probably could
testify about certain facts in issue, it raises a natural inference that the non-producing party fears that
the testimony of the witness on that issue would be unfavorable to (him/her).
An inference is a deduction of fact that may be drawn logically and reasonably from another
fact or group of facts established by the evidence. Whether or not an inference should be drawn is
for you to decide using your own common sens e, knowledge and everyday experience. Ask
yourselves is it probable, logical and reasonable. However, you are never required or compelled to
draw an inference. You alone decide whether the facts and circumstances shown by the evidence
support an inference and you are always free to draw or not to draw an inference. If you draw an
inference, you should weigh it in connection with all the other evidence in the case keeping in mind
that the burden of proof is upon the State to prove all the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable
doubt.
1 Before the trial court can give this charge, euphemistically referred to as a “Clawans” charge, State v.
Clawans, 38 N.J. 162 (1962), or allow a comment in summation on the missing witness, the party seeking the
charge/summation comment MUST, before the parties rest, notify the trial judge and the opposing party
outside the presence of the jury, state the name of the witness/witnesses not called, and indicate why this
witness/witnesses have superior knowledge of the relevant facts. State v. Hill, 199 N.J. 545, 560-61 (2009).
The trial court must rule on this issue before a ju ry instruction OR summation comment is allowed. Id. at
561. In making its decision, the trial court must consider various factors, id. at 561, and place on the record
findings as to each of these factors. Ibid. Note that this charge rarely should be given against a defendant. See
Witness – Failure of the Defendant to Produce charge.
History
Revised 6/14/10
Provenance
- Source
- njcourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- 2026-08-20
- Content hash
532c483d4bdad284c811bad481dd2512d881d9c61e509441e7c7108777125240
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.