Free Proposed Jury Instructions - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:04-cr-00103-REB-MEH

Document 1096-22

Filed 03/30/2007

Page 1 of 4

INSTRUCTION NO. G-21 CONSPIRACY 18 U.S.C. § 371 Each defendant is charged in Count 1 with a violation of 18 U.S.C. Section 371. This law makes it a crime to conspire to commit an offense against the United States. To find the defendant whose case you are considering guilty of this crime you must be convinced that the government has proved each of the following beyond a reasonable doubt: First: the defendant agreed with at least one other person to violate the law. Second: one of the conspirators engaged in at least one overt act furthering the conspiracy's objective. Third: the defendant knew the essential objective of the conspiracy. Fourth: the defendant knowingly and voluntarily participated. Fifth: there was interdependence among the members of the conspiracy; that is, the members, in some way or manner, intended to act together for their shared mutual benefit within the scope of the conspiracy charged. Conspiracy--Agreement A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to accomplish an unlawful purpose. It is a kind of "partnership in criminal purposes" in which each member becomes the agent or partner of every other member. Once a person becomes a member of a conspiracy, he is held legally responsible for the acts of the other members done in furtherance of the conspiracy, even though he was not present or aware that the acts were being committed. Mere similarity of conduct among various persons, and the fact they may have associated with each other, and may have assembled together and discussed common aims and interests, does not necessarily establish proof of the existence of a conspiracy.

Case 1:04-cr-00103-REB-MEH

Document 1096-22

Filed 03/30/2007

Page 2 of 4

The evidence in the case need not show that the members entered into any express or formal agreement. Nor is it necessary that the evidence show that the members stated between themselves what their object or purpose was to be, or the details thereof, or the means by which the object or purpose was to be accomplished. In order to establish proof that a conspiracy existed, the evidence must show beyond a reasonable doubt that the members in some way or manner, or through some contrivance, expressly or impliedly came to a mutual understanding to try to accomplish a common and unlawful plan. Evidence The evidence in the case need not establish that all the means or methods set forth in the indictment were agreed upon to carry out the alleged conspiracy; nor that all means or methods, which were agreed upon, were actually used or put into operation; nor that all of the persons charged to have been members of the alleged conspiracy were members. Rather, the evidence in the case must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the alleged conspiracy was knowingly formed; and that one or more of the means or methods described in the indictment were agreed upon to be used, in an effort to effect or accomplish some object or purpose of the conspiracy, as charged in the indictment; and that two or more persons, including the defendant whose case you are considering, were knowingly members of the conspiracy. Membership in Conspiracy If you conclude from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that a conspiracy as charged did exist, then you must next determine whether the defendant whose case you are considering was a member of that conspiracy; that is, whether the defendant participated in the conspiracy with knowledge of its unlawful purposes and in furtherance of its unlawful objectives. In determining whether the defendant was a member of the conspiracy, the jury must consider only his acts and statements. The defendant cannot be

2

Case 1:04-cr-00103-REB-MEH

Document 1096-22

Filed 03/30/2007

Page 3 of 4

bound by the acts or declarations of other participants until it is established that a conspiracy existed, and that he was one of its members. Overt Act The term "overt act" means some type of outward, objective action performed by one of the parties to or one of the members of the agreement or conspiracy which evidences that agreement. Although you must unanimously agree that the same overt act was committed, the government is not required to prove more than one of the overt acts charged in Count 1. The overt act may, but for the alleged illegal agreement, appear totally innocent and legal. Interdependence To be a member of the conspiracy, the defendant whose case you are considering need not know all of the other members or all of the details of the conspiracy, nor the means by which the objects were to be accomplished. Each member of the conspiracy may perform separate and distinct acts. It is necessary, however, that for the defendant to be a member of the conspiracy, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was aware of the common purpose and was a willing participant with the intent to advance the purposes of the conspiracy. In other words, while a defendant need not participate in all the acts or statements of the other members of the conspiracy to be bound by them, the acts or statements must be interdependent so that each member of the conspiracy depends upon the acts and statements of the other conspirators to make the conspiracy succeed. Extent of Participation The extent of a defendant's participation in the conspiracy is not relevant to whether he is guilty or not guilty. A defendant may be convicted as a conspirator even though he plays a minor part in the conspiracy. His financial stake, if any, in the venture is a factor

3

Case 1:04-cr-00103-REB-MEH

Document 1096-22

Filed 03/30/2007

Page 4 of 4

that may be considered in determining whether a conspiracy existed and whether the defendant was a member of it.

Criminal Pattern Jury Instructions (Tenth Circuit), Nos. 2.19, 2.87 (2005); O'Malley, Grening, & Lee, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions, § 31.07 (5th ed. 2005) (overt act definition). 4