Jury Instructions
172 linesJUDGE EVERETT: Everyone can be seated.
JUDGE EVERETT: Before I run the jury instructions for both the jurors and the parties, did anyone have anything to raise concerning them?
MS. MEYERS: Yes, Your Honor, very briefly, and I apologize for not emailing you over the weekend.
JUDGE EVERETT: I was about to ask why this didn't happen, but go ahead.
MS. MEYERS: It's a long weekend, Your Honor.
MS. MEYERS: So, just minor. On page 2, under 3.5b, it says — to be a principal, the last sentence: "to be a principal the defendant does not have to be present when the crime is committed or attempted." It is a correct statement of the law, but I wonder if we need "or attempted" to be consistent, because we've taken out "attempted" in other areas.
JUDGE EVERETT: Right. State, do you have a position concerning?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No, sir.
JUDGE EVERETT: Well, I believe there aren't any attempts that are a part of the charged offenses — just completed offenses — so that will remove "attempted." Is there anything else?
MS. MEYERS: Two more, Your Honor. One is just a typographical. On page 4, under 3.7, in the first paragraph, third line down, it reads "information."
MS. MEYERS: I think it should read "indictment."
JUDGE EVERETT: Yes.
MS. MEYERS: And then lastly, on page 7, under verdict, 3.12 — it is the standard instruction, but it refers to lesser-includeds, and since parties have waived lesser-includeds, I think perhaps the first paragraph ought to come out, and —
MS. MEYERS: I think that for the second paragraph first...
JUDGE EVERETT: Well, I would believe it would just read, "You may find the defendant guilty as charged or not guilty."
MS. MEYERS: Yes, that's fine.
JUDGE EVERETT: All right, go ahead.
MS. MEYERS: And then the second paragraph, the first sentence has a clause which reads "it should be for the highest" — defense on the verdict form.
MS. MEYERS: I think perhaps you could take out "highest."
JUDGE EVERETT: State, do you wish to be heard as to any of these other edits?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No, Your Honor.
JUDGE EVERETT: It's going to take a few minutes to go through this, which is why I wanted you to email me.
JUDGE EVERETT: However, we'll get started as soon as this is done. Is there anything else that we need to address?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Judge, the state has provided a laptop for the use in the jury room. It does not have anything on it, it does not have internet access, it's available for inspection if anyone wants to do that, but it's our thought that they would be provided with the headphones that are out here, the other equipment is already back there, and this laptop for their use while reviewing the evidence.
JUDGE EVERETT: Does the defense have a position concerning, will?
MR. RASHBAUM: No, Your Honor.
JUDGE EVERETT: Very well.
JUDGE EVERETT: It will be sent back. Any other issues?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Nothing from the state.
JUDGE EVERETT: I'll email you those changes.
JUDGE EVERETT: And from there, won't need a verdict form, but we'll need 17.
JUDGE EVERETT: We'll get started with bringing in the jurors and reading the instructions.
BAILIFF: Court is back in session.
JUDGE EVERETT: Everyone can be seated.
JUDGE EVERETT: You can pass those out.
JUDGE EVERETT: For everyone in the gallery, I just wanted to give a reminder once again.
JUDGE EVERETT: As the closing arguments are taking place, do not make any gestures. Do not shake your head that you're in agreement or disagreement.
JUDGE EVERETT: Please silence your devices.
JUDGE EVERETT: And also as well, do not have any cameras that are pointed at either the jury or the litigants.
JUDGE EVERETT: You can just put the 15 in the seats.
JUDGE EVERETT: Please get it on silent now.
JUDGE EVERETT: Everyone can be seated.
JUDGE EVERETT: Members of the jury, good morning.
JUDGE EVERETT: Now that the evidence has closed in the case, I am going to be giving you your instructions on the law itself.
JUDGE EVERETT: A copy of the jury instructions that I will be reading to you has been placed in your chairs.
JUDGE EVERETT: After these instructions have been given, the attorneys are going to give you their closing arguments. Let's get started at header 3.1, Introduction to Final Instructions. Members of the jury, I thank you for your attention during this trial. Please pay attention to the instructions I'm about to give you. Charles Adelson, the defendant in this case, has been accused of first-degree murder, conspiracy to commit first-degree murder, and solicitation to commit first-degree murder.
JUDGE EVERETT: Charles Adelson is accused of first-degree murder in count one of the indictment. I will now instruct you on the circumstances that must be proved before Charles Adelson may be found guilty of first-degree murder.
JUDGE EVERETT: To prove the crime of first-degree premeditated murder, the state must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
JUDGE EVERETT: Element 1.
JUDGE EVERETT: Daniel Markel is dead.
JUDGE EVERETT: Element 2.
JUDGE EVERETT: The death was caused by the criminal act of Charles Adelson.
JUDGE EVERETT: Element 3.
JUDGE EVERETT: There was a premeditated killing of Daniel Markel.
JUDGE EVERETT: An act includes a series of related actions arising from and performed pursuant to a single design or purpose.
JUDGE EVERETT: Killing with premeditation is killing after consciously deciding to do so.
JUDGE EVERETT: The decision must be present in the mind at the time of the killing.
JUDGE EVERETT: The law does not fix the exact period of time that must pass between the formation of the premeditated intent to kill and the killing. The period of time must be long enough to allow reflection by the defendant.
JUDGE EVERETT: The premeditated intent to kill must be formed before the killing.
JUDGE EVERETT: The question of premeditation is a question of fact to be determined by you from the evidence.
JUDGE EVERETT: It will be sufficient proof of premeditation if the circumstances of the killing and the conduct of the accused convince you beyond a reasonable doubt of the existence of premeditation at the time of the killing.
JUDGE EVERETT: If the defendant helped another person or persons commit a crime, the defendant is a principal and must be treated as if he had done all the things the other person or persons did if the defendant had a conscious intent that the criminal act be done and the defendant did some act or said some word which was intended to and which did incite, cause, encourage, assist, or advise the other person or persons to actually commit the crime.
JUDGE EVERETT: To be a principal, the defendant does not have to be present when the crime is committed.
JUDGE EVERETT: If the defendant paid or promised to pay another person or persons to commit a crime, the defendant is a principal and must be treated as if he had done all of the things the person who was promised or received the money did if the defendant had a conscious intent that the criminal act be done and he made or promised the payment in exchange for the commission or promised to commit the crime or to help commit the crime, and the crime was committed by Sigfredo Garcia and/or Luis Rivera.
JUDGE EVERETT: To be a principal, the defendant does not have to be present when the crime is committed.
JUDGE EVERETT: To prove the crime of criminal conspiracy, the state must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
JUDGE EVERETT: The intent of Charles Adelson was that the offense of first-degree murder would be committed.
JUDGE EVERETT: In order to carry out the intent, Charles Adelson agreed, conspired, combined, or confederated with Katherine Magbanua and/or other co-conspirators to cause the first-degree murder to be committed either by them or one of them or by some other person.
JUDGE EVERETT: It is not necessary that the agreement, conspiracy, combination, or confederation to commit first-degree murder be expressed in any particular words or that words pass between the conspirators.
JUDGE EVERETT: It is not necessary that the defendant do any act in furtherance of the offense conspired.
JUDGE EVERETT: To prove the crime of criminal solicitation, the state must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
JUDGE EVERETT: Element 1.
JUDGE EVERETT: Charles Adelson solicited Katherine Magbanua, Sigfredo Garcia, and/or Luis Rivera to commit first-degree murder.
JUDGE EVERETT: Element 2.
JUDGE EVERETT: During the solicitation, Charles Adelson commanded, encouraged, hired, or requested Katherine Magbanua, Sigfredo Garcia, and/or Luis Rivera to engage in specific conduct which would constitute the commission of first-degree murder.
JUDGE EVERETT: It is not necessary that the defendant do any act in furtherance of the offense solicited. The crime of first-degree murder has been previously defined in these instructions.
JUDGE EVERETT: To solicit means to ask earnestly or to try to induce another person to engage in specific conduct.
JUDGE EVERETT: The intent with which an act is done is an operation of the mind and therefore is not always capable of direct and positive proof. It may be established by circumstantial evidence like any other fact in a case.
JUDGE EVERETT: The defendant has entered a plea of not guilty.
JUDGE EVERETT: This means you must presume or believe the defendant is innocent.
JUDGE EVERETT: The presumption stays with the defendant as to each material allegation in the indictment through each stage of the trial unless it has been overcome by the evidence to the exclusion of, and beyond a reasonable doubt.
JUDGE EVERETT: To overcome the defendant's presumption of innocence, the state has the burden of proving the crime with which the defendant is charged was committed, and the defendant is the person who committed the crime.
JUDGE EVERETT: The defendant is not required to present evidence or prove anything.
JUDGE EVERETT: Whenever the words "reasonable doubt" are used, you must consider the following.
JUDGE EVERETT: A reasonable doubt is not a mere possible doubt, a speculative, imaginary, or forced doubt.
JUDGE EVERETT: Such a doubt must not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty if you have an abiding conviction of guilt.
JUDGE EVERETT: On the other hand, if, after carefully considering, comparing, and weighing all the evidence, there is not an abiding conviction of guilt, or if having a conviction, it is one which is not stable, but one which waivers and vacillates, then the charge is not proved beyond every reasonable doubt, and you must find the defendant not guilty because the doubt is reasonable.
JUDGE EVERETT: It is to the evidence introduced in this trial, and to it alone, that you are to look for that proof.
JUDGE EVERETT: A reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the defendant may arise from the evidence, conflict in the evidence, or the lack of evidence.
JUDGE EVERETT: If you have a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant not guilty.
JUDGE EVERETT: If you have no reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant guilty.
JUDGE EVERETT: It is up to you to decide what evidence is reliable.
JUDGE EVERETT: You should use your common sense in deciding which is the best evidence and which evidence should not be relied upon in considering your verdict. You may find some of the evidence not reliable or less reliable than other evidence.
JUDGE EVERETT: You should consider how the witnesses acted as well as what they said.
JUDGE EVERETT: Some things you should consider are: did the witness seem to have an opportunity to see and know the things about which the witness testified?
JUDGE EVERETT: Did the witness seem to have an accurate memory?
JUDGE EVERETT: Was the witness honest and straightforward in answering the attorneys' questions?
JUDGE EVERETT: Did the witness have some interest in how the case should be decided?
JUDGE EVERETT: Does the witness's testimony agree with the other testimony and other evidence in the case?
JUDGE EVERETT: Has the witness been offered or received any money, preferred treatment, or other benefit in order to get this witness to testify?
JUDGE EVERETT: Had any pressure or threat been used against the witness that affected the truth of the witness's testimony?
JUDGE EVERETT: Did the witness at some other time make a statement that is inconsistent with the testimony he or she gave in court?
JUDGE EVERETT: Has the witness been convicted of a felony?
JUDGE EVERETT: Whether the state has met its burden of proof does not depend upon the number of witnesses it has called or upon the number of exhibits it has offered, but instead upon the nature and quality of the evidence presented.
JUDGE EVERETT: The fact that a witness is employed in law enforcement does not mean that his or her testimony deserves more or less consideration than that of any other witness.
JUDGE EVERETT: Expert witnesses are like any other witness, with one exception.
JUDGE EVERETT: The law permits an expert witness to give his or her opinion.
JUDGE EVERETT: However, an expert's opinion is reliable only when given on a subject about which you believe him or her to be an expert.
JUDGE EVERETT: Like other witnesses, you may believe or disbelieve all or any part of an expert's testimony.
JUDGE EVERETT: You must consider the testimony of some witnesses with more caution than others.
JUDGE EVERETT: For example, a witness who claims to have helped the defendant commit a crime, has been promised immunity from prosecution, or hopes to gain more favorable treatment in her own case may have a reason to make a false statement in order to strike a good bargain with the state.
JUDGE EVERETT: This is particularly true when there is no other evidence tending to agree with what the witness says about the defendant.
JUDGE EVERETT: So while a witness of that kind may be entirely truthful when testifying, you should consider his or her testimony with more caution than the testimony of other witnesses.
JUDGE EVERETT: However, if the testimony of such a witness convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt of the defendant's guilt, or the other evidence in the case does so, then you should find the defendant guilty.
JUDGE EVERETT: The defendant in this case has become a witness.
JUDGE EVERETT: You should apply the same rules to consideration of his testimony that you apply to the testimony of other witnesses.
JUDGE EVERETT: It is entirely proper for a lawyer to talk to a witness about what testimony the witness would give if called to the courtroom.
JUDGE EVERETT: The witness should not be discredited by talking to a lawyer about his or her testimony.
JUDGE EVERETT: You may rely upon your own conclusion about the credibility of any witness.
JUDGE EVERETT: A juror may believe or disbelieve all or any part of the evidence or the testimony of any witness.
JUDGE EVERETT: There are some general rules that apply to your discussion.
JUDGE EVERETT: You must follow these rules in order to return a lawful verdict.
JUDGE EVERETT: Number 1.
JUDGE EVERETT: You must follow the law as it is set out in these instructions.
JUDGE EVERETT: If you fail to follow the law, your verdict will be a miscarriage of justice.
JUDGE EVERETT: There is no reason for failing to follow the law in this case.
JUDGE EVERETT: All of us are depending upon you to make a wise and legal decision in this matter.
JUDGE EVERETT: Number 2: this case must be decided only upon the evidence that you have heard from the testimony of the witnesses and have seen in the form of the exhibits and evidence and these instructions.
JUDGE EVERETT: Number three, this case must not be decided for or against anyone because you feel sorry for anyone or are angry at anyone.
JUDGE EVERETT: Number four.
JUDGE EVERETT: Remember, the lawyers are not on trial.
JUDGE EVERETT: Your feelings about them should not influence your decision in this case.
JUDGE EVERETT: Number five, your duty is to determine if the defendant has been proven guilty or not in accord with the law. It will be my job to determine a proper sentence if the defendant is found guilty.
JUDGE EVERETT: Number six, whatever verdict you render must be unanimous. That is, each juror must agree to the same verdict.
JUDGE EVERETT: Number seven, your verdict should not be influenced by feelings of prejudice, bias, or sympathy.
JUDGE EVERETT: Your verdict must be based on the evidence and on the law contained in these instructions.
JUDGE EVERETT: Deciding a verdict is exclusively your job. I cannot participate in that decision in any way. Please disregard anything I may have said or done that made you think I preferred one verdict over another.
JUDGE EVERETT: A separate crime is charged in each count of the indictment, and although they have been tried together, each crime and the evidence applicable to it must be considered separately, and a separate verdict returned as to each.
JUDGE EVERETT: A finding of guilty or not guilty as to one crime must not affect your verdict as to the other crimes charged.
JUDGE EVERETT: You may find the defendant guilty as charged or not guilty.
JUDGE EVERETT: If you return a verdict of guilty, it should be for the offense on the verdict form that has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
JUDGE EVERETT: If you find that no offense has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then, of course, your verdict must be not guilty.
JUDGE EVERETT: The verdict must be unanimous. That is, all of you must agree to the same verdict.
JUDGE EVERETT: Only one verdict may be returned as to the crime charged.
JUDGE EVERETT: The verdict must be in writing, and for your convenience, the necessary verdict form has been prepared for you. It is as follows. And there is actually only one verdict form because we're not going to introduce chaos into the case, but I will read it to you now.
JUDGE EVERETT: State of Florida v. Charles Adelson, case number 2016-CF-3036B.
JUDGE EVERETT: We, the jury, find as follows as to count one of the indictment: first-degree murder.
JUDGE EVERETT: Check only one letter choice as to this count.
JUDGE EVERETT: Option A.
JUDGE EVERETT: The defendant is guilty of first-degree murder.
JUDGE EVERETT: Option B.
JUDGE EVERETT: The defendant is not guilty as to count one.
JUDGE EVERETT: Count two.
JUDGE EVERETT: We, the jury, find as follows as to count two of the indictment: conspiracy to commit first-degree murder.
JUDGE EVERETT: Check only one letter choice as to this count.
JUDGE EVERETT: Option A.
JUDGE EVERETT: The defendant is guilty of conspiracy to commit first-degree murder.
JUDGE EVERETT: Option B. The defendant is not guilty as to count two.
JUDGE EVERETT: Count three.
JUDGE EVERETT: We, the jury, find as follows as to count three of the indictment.
JUDGE EVERETT: Solicitation to commit first-degree murder.
JUDGE EVERETT: Check only one letter choice as to this count.
JUDGE EVERETT: Option A.
JUDGE EVERETT: The defendant is guilty of solicitation to commit first-degree murder.
JUDGE EVERETT: Option B. The defendant is not guilty as to count three.
JUDGE EVERETT: And then it is to be signed and dated by the individual who will serve as the foreperson.
JUDGE EVERETT: Both the State and the defendant have now rested their cases.
JUDGE EVERETT: The attorneys will now present their final arguments.
JUDGE EVERETT: Please remember that what the attorneys say is not evidence or your instruction on the law.
JUDGE EVERETT: However, do listen closely to their arguments. They are intended to aid you in understanding the case.
JUDGE EVERETT: Each side will have equal time, but the State is entitled to divide this time between an opening argument and a rebuttal argument after the defense has given its closing argument.
JUDGE EVERETT: Whether or not you take notes, you should rely on your memory of the evidence, and you should not be unduly influenced by the notes of other jurors. Notes are not entitled to any greater weight than each juror's memory of the evidence.