(N.J.S.A. 2C:24-9) model jury charge
The
defendant(s) is (are) charged in count of the indictment with the crime of employing
a juvenile to commit a criminal offense. (Here read pertinent count of
indictment).
That
section of our statutes provides in pertinent part that:
Any person being at least 18 years of age who
knowingly uses, solicits, directs, hires, employs or conspires with a person
who is in fact 17 years of age or younger to commit a criminal offense is
guilty of a crime.
In
order for you to find the defendant guilty of this offense, the State must
prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That the defendant was at least 18 years
of age;
(2) That the defendant knowingly used,
solicited, directed, hired, employed or conspired with (Name)
to commit or aid in the
commission of the crime; and
(3) That (Name)
was in fact 17 years of age
or younger.
The
first element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that the
defendant was at least 18 years old at the time he/she engaged in the conduct alleged in
the indictment.
The
second element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that the
defendant knowingly used, solicited, directed, hired, employed or conspired
with (Name) to commit or aid in the commission of the
crime described in count of the indictment. (Read pertinent part of N.J.S.A.
2C:5-2 or the charge for the appropriate crime allegedly committed).[1]
The
mere fact that a juvenile and an adult are participants in the same criminal
act is insufficient to prove this element of the offense; rather, the State
must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant used, solicited,
directed, hired, employed or conspired with (Name)
.[2]
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 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. Knowledge is a
condition of the mind that cannot be seen and can only be determined by inference
from conduct, words or acts. Therefore, it is not necessary that witnesses be
produced by the State to testify that a defendant said that he/she knowingly did something. His/Her knowledge may be gathered from his/her acts and his/her conduct and from all he/she said and did at the particular time
and place and from all the surrounding circumstances reflected in the testimony
[and evidence adduced at trial].
The
third element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that the
person used, solicited, directed, hired, employed or conspired with was in fact
17 years of age or younger at the time. It is no defense to a prosecution under
this statute that the defendant mistakenly believed that the person whom he/she
used, solicited, directed, hired, employed, or conspired with was 18 years of
age or older, even if that mistaken belief was reasonable.
If
you find that the State has proven beyond a reasonable doubt each of the three
elements, that is, that the defendant was at least 18 years old, that he/she knowingly used, solicited, directed,
hired, employed or conspired with (Name)
, and that (Name) was 17 years old or younger, then you must
convict him/her of employing a juvenile to commit a criminal offense. If the State has
failed to prove any of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt, then you must
find the defendant not guilty.
