3d Cir. Model Jury Instr. (Criminal) 7.03

(Pinkerton Liability)

Count(s) (no.) of the indictment charge(s) that on or about the___ day of

_______, 2__, in the _______ District of _______, (name of defendant) committed (state

offense(s)).

The government may prove (name) guilty of (this) (these) offense(s) by proving

that (name) personally committed it (them). The government may also prove (name)

guilty of (this) (these) offense(s) based on the legal rule that each member of a

conspiracy is responsible for crimes and other acts committed by the other members,

as long as those crimes and acts were committed to help further or achieve the

objective of the conspiracy and were reasonably foreseeable to (name) as a necessary

or natural consequence of the agreement. In other words, under certain

circumstances the act of one conspirator may be treated as the act of all. This means

that all the conspirators may be convicted of a crime committed by any one or more

of them, even though they did not all personally participate in that crime themselves.

In order for you to find (name) guilty of (state offense(s)) charged in Count(s)

(no.) based on this legal rule, you must find that the government proved beyond a

reasonable doubt each of the following four (4) requirements:

First: That (name) was a member of the conspiracy charged in the indictment;

Second: That while (name) was still a member of the conspiracy, one or more

of the other members of the conspiracy committed the offense(s) charged in

18

Count(s) (no), by committing each of the elements of (that) (those) offense(s), as

(I explained) (will explain) those elements to you in these instructions.

[However, the other member(s) of the conspiracy need not have been found guilty of

(or even charged with) the offense(s), as long as you find that the government

proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the other member(s) committed the

offense(s).]

Third: That the other member(s) of the conspiracy committed (this) (these)

offense(s) within the scope of the unlawful agreement and to help further or

achieve the objective(s) of the conspiracy; and

Fourth: That (this) (these) offense(s) (was) (were) reasonably foreseeable to or

reasonably anticipated by (name) as a necessary or natural consequence(s) of

the unlawful agreement.

The government does not have to prove that (name) specifically agreed or

knew that (this) (these) offense(s) would be committed. However, the government

must prove that the offense(s) (was) (were) reasonably foreseeable to (name), as a

member of the conspiracy, and within the scope of the agreement as (name)

understood it.

[As I have instructed you, in order to prove that (name) was a member of the

conspiracy charged in the indictment, the government must prove that (name) knew of the

objective(s) of the conspiracy to commit an offense(s) against the United States, namely the

offense(s) of (state the offense(s) alleged as the object(s) of the conspiracy), and intended

19

to join together with at least one other alleged conspirator to achieve (that) (these)

objective(s). However, for you to find name guilty of (state offense(s)) charged in

Count(s) (no.) based on the rule that each member of a conspiracy is responsible for

crimes committed by the other members, the government does not have to prove that

(name) specifically agreed or knew that (this) (these) offense(s) would be committed, as

long as the government proves that the offense(s) (was) (were) reasonably foreseeable to

(name), as a member of the conspiracy, and within the scope of the agreement as (name)

understood it.]