3d Cir. Model Jury Instr. (Civil) 4.13.1

2

Model 3

4

As you know, [plaintiff ’s] claims in this case relate to [his/her] [arrest] [prosecution] for 5

the crime of [describe crime]. 6

7

[At various points in a criminal case,] the government must meet certain requirements in 8

order to [stop, arrest, and ultimately] convict a person for a crime. It is important to distinguish 9

between those requirements and the requirements of proof in this civil case. 10

11

[In order to “stop” a person, a police officer must have a “reasonable suspicion” that the 12

person they stop has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. There must be 13

specific facts that, taken together with the rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrant 14

the stop.] 15

16

[In order to arrest a person, the police must have probable cause to believe the person 17

committed a crime. Probable cause requires more than mere suspicion; however, it does not 18

require that the officer have evidence sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The 19

standard of probable cause represents a balance between the individual ’s right to liberty and the 20

government’s duty to control crime. Because police officers often confront ambiguous situations, 21

room must be allowed for some mistakes on their part. But the mistakes must be those of 22

reasonable officers.] 23

24

In order for a jury to convict a person of a crime, the government must prove the person’s 25

guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves the jury 26

firmly convinced of the defendant's guilt. If a jury in a criminal case thinks there is a real 27

possibility that the defendant is not guilty, the jury must give the defendant the benefit of the doubt 28

and find [him/her] not guilty. 29

30

[Thus, the fact that the jury found [plaintiff] not guilty in the criminal trial does not 31

necessarily indicate that the jury in the criminal trial found [plaintiff] innocent; it indicates only 32

that the government failed to prove [plaintiff] guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.] 33

34

[The existence of probable cause to make an arrest is evaluated in light of the facts and 35

circumstances available to the police officer at the time. And probable cause is a less demanding 36

standard than guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, the fact that the jury found [plaintiff] not 37

guilty in the criminal trial does not indicate whether or not the police had probable cause to arrest 38

[plaintiff].] 39