(N.J.S.A. 2C:5-2e)
The defendant has raised the defense of
renunciation. Even if you are satisfied
that the defendant conspired to commit the crime of ________________________,
you must nevertheless find defendant Not Guilty if you find that afterwards he/she informed the authorities of the existence of the
conspiracy, including his/her
participation in it, and that he/she was thereby successful in thwarting or causing to be
thwarted, i.e., preventing or causing to be prevented, the commission of any
offense in furtherance of the conspiracy.
This defense further requires you to be satisfied that the circumstances
of defendant's going to the authorities manifested a voluntary and complete
renunciation of his/her
earlier criminal purpose.
Renunciation is not voluntary if the
reason the defendant went to the authorities was that he/she learned something which would make it more likely that the
authorities would arrest him/her or detect what he/she had done; or if he/she went to the authorities because he/she learned something that would make it more difficult to
commit the crime which was the object of the conspiracy. Renunciation is not complete if the defendant
went to the authorities without completely washing his/her
hands of the conspiracy. It is no
defense if the defendant merely meant to postpone his/her
criminal objective to a more advantageous time or to transfer his/her
criminal efforts to some other victim or to some different but similar crime.
(DISCUSS EVIDENCE OF RENUNCIATION)
I previously instructed you that the
State has the burden of proving the elements of the crime of conspiracy beyond
a reasonable doubt. The defendant has
the burden of proving the defense of renunciation. That burden, however, is not so heavy as the
one on the State. While the State must
convince you beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime
of conspiracy, the defendant need only convince you by a preponderance, or the
greater weight, of the evidence that he/she renounced the crime.
This means that the defendant has established the defense of renunciation
if he/she has satisfied you that it is more likely than not that
he/she
(1) Informed
the authorities of the existence of the conspiracy and his/her
participation in it, and
(2) Thwarted or caused to be thwarted the
commission of any offense in furtherance of the conspiracy. An attempt to commit a crime is not
considered an offense for purposes of renunciation, and
(3) That he/she did so under circumstances manifesting a voluntary and complete renunciation of his/her
original criminal purpose.
If, after a consideration of all of the
evidence, you find that the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the
defendant committed the crime of conspiracy, and you also find that the
defendant has not proven the defense of renunciation by a preponderance of the
evidence, then you must find the defendant Guilty. On the other hand, if you do not find that
the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the
crime of conspiracy, or if you find that the State has proven the crime of
conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt but that the defendant has also proven the
defense of renunciation by a preponderance of the evidence, then you must find
the defendant Not Guilty.
[1] This charge applies only to conspiracy charges. If defendant is also charged with an
attempted offense to which he/she is claiming renunciation, the attempt
renunciation charge should be used. See
N.J.S.A. 2C:5-1d.
