AGGRAVATED ASSAULT - SERIOUS BODILY INJURY
N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1b(1)
In
Count ________of the indictment, the defendant(s) is
(are) charged with the crime
of
aggravated assault in that (he/she/they) allegedly on ________ in the _________
(Date) (Municipality)
(READ PERTINENT LANGUAGE OF INDICTMENT)
The
defendant(s) is (are) accused of violating a section of our State statutes that
reads as follows:
A person is guilty of aggravated assault if he . . .
(a)ttempts to cause serious bodily injury to another, or causes such injury
purposely or knowingly or under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference
to the value of human life recklessly causes such injury.
Under this
statute, the defendant(s) can be found guilty if (he/she/they) EITHER
caused serious bodily injury to another OR attempted to cause serious
bodily injury to another.
To find the
defendant(s) guilty of aggravated assault for causing serious bodily injury to
another, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following
elements:
1. That
the defendant(s) caused serious bodily injury to another; and
2. That the defendant(s) acted purposely or
knowingly or acted recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme
indifference to the value of human life.
The first element
that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that the defendant(s)
caused serious bodily injury to another.
Serious bodily
injury means bodily injury which creates a substantial risk of death or which
causes serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the
function of any bodily member or organ.
The second
element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that the
defendant(s) acted purposely or knowingly or acted recklessly under
circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life.
A person acts
purposely with respect to the result of his/her conduct if it
is his/her conscious
object to cause such a result. A person acts purposely if he/she acts with design, with a specific intent, with a particular object or
purpose, or if he/she means to do what he/she does (e.g., “I did it on purpose”).
A person acts knowingly with respect to the
result of his/her conduct if he/she is aware that it is practically certain that his/her conduct will
cause such a result.
A person acts
recklessly with respect to the result of his/her conduct if he/she consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the
result will occur from his/her conduct. The
risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering the nature and
purpose of the actor’s conduct and the circumstances known to the actor, its
disregard involves a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a
reasonable person would observe in the actor’s situation. One is said to act
recklessly if one acts with recklessness, with scorn for the consequences,
heedlessly, fool-hardily.
The phrase
“under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human
life” does not focus on the state of mind of the actor, but rather on the
circumstances under which you find that he/she acted. If, in light of
all the evidence, you find that the conduct of the defendant(s) resulted in a
probability as opposed to a mere possibility of serious bodily injury, then you
may find that (he/she/they) acted under circumstances manifesting extreme
indifference to the value of human life.[1]
In determining
whether the defendant(s) acted purposely or knowingly or acted recklessly under
circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, you
may consider the nature of the act(s) itself(themselves) and the severity of
the resulting injury (injuries).
(NOTE: When the actual victim is one other than the
intended victim, the jury should be instructed that it is immaterial that the
actual victim was not the intended victim).
If you find that the
State has proved each element beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must find the
defendant(s) guilty. All jurors do not have to agree unanimously concerning
which form of serious bodily injury aggravated assault is present so long as
all believe that it was one form of serious bodily injury or the other.
However, for a defendant to be guilty of serious bodily injury aggravated
assault, all jurors must agree that the defendant either knowingly or purposely
or recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value
of human life caused serious bodily injury to (insert victim’s name).
If you find that the
State has failed to prove any element beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must
find the defendant(s) not guilty of the charge of aggravated assault in that (he/she/they)
caused serious bodily injury to another.
As I previously
instructed you, the defendant(s) can be found guilty if (he/she/they) EITHER
caused serious bodily injury to another OR attempted to cause serious
bodily injury to another.
To find the
defendant(s) guilty of attempting to cause serious bodily injury to another,
the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant(s) purposely[2]
attempted to cause serious bodily injury to another. If you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant(s)
attempted to cause serious bodily injury, it does not matter whether such
injury actually resulted.
The law provides
that a person is guilty of attempt if, acting purposefully, he/she:
(select appropriate section)
1. Engaged in conduct that would
constitute the offense if the attendant circumstances were as a reasonable
person would believe them to be;
(or)
2. Did (or omitted to do) anything with
the purpose of causing serious bodily injury to another without further conduct
on his/her part. This
means that the defendant(s) did something designed to cause serious bodily
injury without having to take any further action.
(or)
3. Did (or omitted to do) anything that,
under the circumstances as a reasonable person would believe them to be, was an
act (or omission) constituting as substantial step in a course of conduct
planned to culminate in his/her commission of
the crime. The step taken must be one that is strongly corroborative of the
defendant’s criminal purpose. The accused must be shown to have had a firmness
of criminal purpose in light of the step(s) he/she had already taken. These preparatory steps must be substantial and not
just very remote preparatory acts.[3]
Serious bodily
injury means bodily injury which creates a substantial risk of death or which
causes serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the
function of any bodily member or organ.
A person acts
purposely with respect to the result of his/her conduct if it
is his/her conscious
object to cause such a result. A person acts purposely if he/she acts with design, with a specific intent, with a particular object or
purpose, or if he/she means to do what he/she does (e.g., “I did it on purpose”).
If you find that
the State has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant(s) attempted
to cause serious bodily injury to another, then you must find the defendant(s)
guilty.[4]
If you find that
the State has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant(s)
attempted to cause serious bodily injury to another, then you must find the
defendant(s) not guilty.[5]
[1]
In State v. Curtis, 195 N.J.
Super. 354, 364-65 (App. Div. 1984), certif. den., 99 N.J.
212 (1984), the Court found, in the context of aggravated manslaughter, that
the difference between recklessness under circumstances manifesting extreme
indifference to human life and mere recklessness is the difference between the
probability as opposed to the possibility that a certain result will
occur. The Supreme Court endorsed Curtis
in State v. Breakiron, 108 N.J. 591, 605 (1987). The case law has applied the Curtis
probability standard to the aggravated-assault statute. State v. Scher, 278 N.J.
Super. 249, 272 (App. Div. 1994), certif. den., 140 N.J. 276
(1995); State v. Oriole, 243 N.J. Super. 688, 693 (Law Div.
1990). Please note that in the
aggravated-assault statute the Legislature has used the term “extreme
indifference to the value of human life” while the aggravated-manslaughter
statute speaks in terms of “extreme indifference to human life.” Therefore, the indifference referred to
in the aggravated-assault statute would appear not to relate to whether the
victim lives or dies but rather to the value of the victim’s life.
[2]
When a person actually causes serious
bodily injury, it does not matter whether his mental state is purposeful,
knowing or reckless (under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to
the value of human life). When,
however, the person attempts to cause, but does not cause, serious bodily
injury, he must act purposefully.
Cf. State v. McAllister, 211 N.J. Super. 355, 362 (App.
Div. 1986).
[3]
State v. Fornino, 223 N.J.
531, 538 (App. Div. 1988), certif, den., 111 N.J. 570 (1988); cert.
den., 488 U.S. 859, 109 S.Ct. 152, 102 L.Ed. 2d 123
(1988).
[5]
In second degree aggravated assault cases
involving the use of a deadly weapon, it may be appropriate to instruct the
jury on the following lesser offenses: third degree aggravated assault, N.J.S.A.
2C:12-1b(2); fourth degree aggravated assault, N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1b(3); and
simple assault, N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1a(1) and (2). State v. Villar,
292 N.J. Super. 320, 326-330 (App. Div. 1996), rev’d. o.g., 150 N.J.
503, 517 n. 4 (1997). See also, State v. Sloane, 111 N.J.
293, 301 (1988). These offenses may be charged as lesser offenses even though
third degree aggravated assault, fourth degree aggravated assault and a(2)
disorderly persons simple assault contain an element (a deadly weapon) that is
not an element of second degree aggravated assault. State v. Villar, supra;
State v. Sloane, supra. When these lesser offenses are to be
charged, the trial court and counsel should construct a sequence of the lesser
offenses to be charged. State v. Villar, 150 N.J. at 517 n. 4.