(N.J.S.A. 2C:29-8)
The defendant is charged with the crime of corrupting or influencing a jury. The indictment reads in pertinent part as follows:
(Read indictment)
This indictment is based on a statute which provides:
Any person who, directly or indirectly, corrupts, influences or attempts to corrupt or influence a jury or juror to be more favorable to the one side than to the other by promises, persuasions, entreaties, threats, letters, money, entertainment or other sinister means; or any person who employs any unfair or fraudulent practice, art or contrivance to obtain a verdict, or attempts to instruct a jury or juror beforehand at any place or time, or in any manner or way, except in open court at the trial of the cause, by the strength of the evidence, the arguments of the parties or their counsel, or the opinion or charge of the court is guilty of crime.
In order for you to find the defendant guilty of this offense, the State is required to prove each of the following elements to you beyond a reasonable doubt:
(Charge as appropriate)
(1) that the defendant, directly or indirectly, corrupted, influenced or attempted to corrupt or influence a jury or juror to be more favorable to one side than to the other by promises, persuasions, entreaties, threats, letters, money, entertainment or other sinister means;
(or)
(1) that defendant employed any unfair or fraudulent practice, art or contrivance to obtain a verdict, or attempted to instruct a jury or juror beforehand at any place or time, or in any manner or way, except in open court during the course of the trial;
and
(2) that defendant acted knowingly (except that in a case of attempt defendant must have acted purposely).
A person acts knowingly with respect to the nature of (his/her) conduct or the attendant circumstances if (he/she) is aware that (his/her) conduct is of that nature, or that such
CORRUPTING OR INFLUENCING A JURY
(N.J.S.A. 2C:29-8)
Page 2 of 2
circumstances exist, or (he/she) is aware of a high probability of their existence. A person acts knowingly with respect to a result of (his/her) conduct if (he/she) is aware that it is practically certain that (his/her) conduct will cause such a result. "Knowing," "with knowledge" or equivalent terms have the same meaning.
(A person acts purposely with respect to the nature of (his/her) conduct or a result thereof if it is (his/her) conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result. A person acts purposely with respect to attendant circumstances if (he/she) is aware of the existence of such circumstances or (he/she) believes or hopes that they exist. "With purpose," "designed," "with design" or equivalent terms have the same meaning.)
If you find that the State has not proven each and every element of the crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt, you must find the defendant not guilty. On the other hand, if you find that the State has proven all of the required elements beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant guilty.
If you find the defendant not guilty, then the deliberations (on this count) end.
(Charge where appropriate)
If you find the defendant guilty, then you must go on with your deliberations to consider the degree of the offense.
Under the statute, corrupting or influencing a Jury is a crime of the third degree. However, it is a crime of the second degree if it is committed by means of violence or the threat of violence.
The burden of proof is on the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant employed violence or the threat of violence in committing the alleged crime. If you find that the State has proven the defendant's guilt of corrupting by influencing a jury, but that it has not carried the additional burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that (he/she) employed violence or the threat of violence, then you must find the defendant guilty of the third degree offense. on the other hand, if you find that the state has carried its burden beyond a reasonable doubt, both as to guilt and the degree of the crime, then you must find the defendant guilty of the second degree offense.
In sum, there are three possible verdicts for you to consider: (1) not guilty, (2) guilty of corrupting or influencing a jury in the third degree, and (3) guilty of corrupting or influencing a jury in the second degree.
