VA · jury_instructions
Va. Model Jury Instr. Crim. No. 22.610
Methamphetamine Precursor Chemicals—Possession with Intent to Manufacture Methamphetamine, Methcathinone or Amphetamine
The defendant is charged with the crime of possessing substances with intent to manufacture
methamphetamine, methcathinone or amphetamine.
The Commonwealth must prove beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) that the defendant possessed
[names of two or more substances listed in Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-248(J)]; and (2) that the defendant
possessed these substances with the intent to manufacture methamphetamine, methcathinone or
amphetamine.
If you find from the evidence that the Commonwealth has proved beyond a reasonable doubt
each of the above elements of the crime as charged, then you shall find the defendant guilty [but
you shall not fix the punishment until your verdict has been returned and further evidence has been heard
by you].
If you find that the Commonwealth has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt either or
both of the above elements, then you shall find the defendant not guilty.
History
Virginia Model Jury Instructions – Criminal, Release 26, October 2025. The unannotated set, posted by the Supreme Court of Virginia at vacourts.gov; the book states that it is made available with the permission of the publisher, Matthew Bender & Company, Inc.
Provenance
- Source
- vacourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-10-11
- Edition
- crim-2025-10-01
- Content hash
153217dc1b89d6c778960b640eb0901734bc1b2d5ca2fd6bd9a5eee1215f8cbc
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.