The Committee on Model Criminal Jury Instructions solicits comment on the following proposal by January 1, 2022. Comments may be sent in writing to Samuel R. Smith, Reporter, Committee on Model Criminal Jury Instructions, Michigan Hall of Justice, P.O. Box 30052, Lansing, MI 48909-7604, or electronically to
MCrimJI@courts.mi.gov.
PROPOSED
The Committee proposes to amend M Crim JI 20.11 [Sexual Act with Mentally Incapable, Mentally Disabled, Mentally Incapacitated, or Physically Helpless Person] to eliminate the element requiring that the defendant know of the complainant’s mental impairment because the applicable statute, MCL 750.520b(1)(h), does not require proof of such knowledge. Deletions are in strike-through, and new language is underlined.
[AMENDED] M Crim JI 20.11
Sexual Act with Mentally Incapable, Mentally Disabled, Mentally Incapacitated, or Physically Helpless Person
- [Second / Third], that [name complainant] was [mentally incapable / mentally disabled / mentally incapacitated / physically helpless] at the time of the alleged act.
[Choose one or more of (2), (3), (4), or (5):]
- Mentally incapable means that [name complainant] was suffering from a mental disease or defect that made [him / her] incapable of appraising either the physical or moral nature of [his / her] conduct.
- Mentally disabled means that [name complainant] has a mental illness, is intellectually disabled, or has a developmental disability. “Mental illness” is a substantial disorder of thought or mood that significantly impairs judgment, behavior, or the ability to recognize reality and deal with the ordinary demands of life. “Intellectual disability” means significantly subaverage intellectual functioning that appeared before [name complainant] was 18 years old and impaired two or more of [his / her] adaptive skills.1 “Developmental disability” means an impairment of general thinking or behavior that originated before the age of eighteen, has continued since it started or can be expected to continue indefinitely, is a substantial burden to [name complainant]’s ability to function in society, and is caused by [intellectual disability as described / cerebral palsy / epilepsy / autism / an impairing condition requiring treatment and services similar to those required for intellectual disability].
- Mentally incapacitated means that [name complainant] was [temporarily] unable to understand or control what [he / she] was doing because of [drugs, alcohol or another substance given to (him/her) / something done to (him / her)] without [his / her] consent.
- Physically helpless means that [name complainant] was unconscious, asleep, or physical incapable to communicate that take part in the alleged act.
[Third / Fourth], that the defendant knew or should have known that [name complainant] was [mentally incapable / mentally incapacitated / physically helpless] at the time of the alleged act.
[Choose the appropriate option according to the charge and the evidence:]
(6) [Fourth / Fifth Third / Fourth], that the defendant and [name complainant] were related to each other, either by blood or marriage, as [state relationship, e.g., first cousins].
(6) [Fourth / Fifth Third / Fourth], that at the time of the alleged act the defendant was in a position of authority over [name complainant], and used this authority to coerce [name complainant] to submit to the sexual acts alleged. It is for you to decide whether, under the facts and circumstances of this case, the defendant was in a position of authority.
The Committee on Model Criminal Jury Instructions solicits comment on the following proposal by January 1, 2022. Comments may be sent in writing to Samuel R. Smith, Reporter, Committee on Model Criminal Jury Instructions, Michigan Hall of Justice, P.O. Box 30052, Lansing, MI 48909-7604, or electronically to MCrimJI@courts. mi.gov.
PROPOSED
The Committee proposes to amend M Crim JI 24.1 [Unlawfully Driving Away an Automobile] to correct the fourth element currently addressing “intent” to be in accord with the statutory language of MCL 750.413 and People v Crosby 82 Mich App 1 (1978). Deletions are in strike-through, and new language is underlined.
[AMENDED] M Crim JI 24.1
Unlawfully Driving Away an Automobile
- The defendant is charged with the crime of unlawfully driving away a motor vehicle. To prove this charge, the prosecutor must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
- First, that the vehicle belonged to someone else.
- Second, that the defendant took possession of the vehicle and [drove / took] it away.
- Third, that these acts were both done [without authority / without the owner’s permission].
- Fourth, that
the defendant intended to take possession of the vehicle and [drive / take] it away. when the defendant took possession of the vehicle and drove or took it away, [he / she] did so knowing that [he / she] did not have authority to do so. It does not matter whether the defendant intended to keep the vehicle.*
[(6) Anyone who assists in taking possession of a vehicle or assists in driving or taking away a vehicle knowing that the vehicle was unlawfully possessed is also guilty of this crime if the assistance was given with the intention of helping another commit this crime.]
Use Note
To distinguish unlawfully taking and using from UDAA, see M Crim JI 24.4.
This is a specific intent crime
The Committee on Model Criminal Jury Instructions solicits comment on the following proposal by January 1, 2022. Comments may be sent in writing to Samuel R. Smith, Reporter, Committee on Model Criminal Jury Instructions, Michigan Hall of Justice, P.O. Box 30052, Lansing, MI 48909-7604, or electronically to MCrimJI@courts. mi.gov.
PROPOSED
The Committee proposes to amend M Crim JI 3.13 [Penalty] to remove any possible implication that the jury should find the defendant guilty so that the court could perform its duty of imposing a penalty. Deletions are in strike-through, and new language is underlined.
[AMENDED] M Crim JI 3.13 Penalty
Possible penalty should not influence your decision. If you find the defendant guilty, it It is the duty of the judge to fix the penalty within the limits provided by law.
The Committee on Model Criminal Jury Instructions solicits comment on the following proposal by January 1, 2022. Comments may be sent in writing to Samuel R. Smith, Reporter, Committee on Model Criminal Jury Instructions, Michigan Hall of Justice, P.O. Box 30052, Lansing, MI 48909-7604, or electronically to MCrimJI@courts.mi.gov.
PROPOSED
The Committee proposes a new instruction, M Crim JI 34.6 [Food Stamp Fraud], for crimes charged under MCL 750.300a.
[NEW] M Crim JI 34.6 Food Stamp Fraud
- The defendant is charged with food stamp fraud. To prove this charge, the prosecutor must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
- First, that the defendant [used / transferred / acquired / altered / purchased / possessed / presented for redemption / transported] food stamps, coupons, or access devices. Food stamps or coupons means the coupons issued pursuant to the food stamp program established under the Food Stamp Act. An access device means any card, plate, code, account number, or other means of access that can be used, alone or in conjunction with another access device, to obtain payments, allotments, benefits, money, goods, or other things of value or that can be used to initiate a transfer of funds pursuant to the food stamp program.
- Second, that the defendant [used / transferred / acquired / altered / purchased / possessed / presented for redemption / transported] food stamps, coupons, or access devices by [specify alleged wrongful conduct].
- Third, that the defendant knew that [he / she] had [specify alleged wrongful conduct] when [he / she] [used / transferred / acquired / altered / purchased / possessed / presented for redemption / transported] the food stamps, coupons, or access devices.
[Use the following where the aggregate value of food stamps allegedly exceeded $250:]
- Fourth, that the aggregate value of the food stamps, coupons, or access devices was [more than $250.00 but less than $1,000 / $1,000 or more]. The aggregate value is the total face value of any food stamps or coupons resulting from the alleged [specify alleged wrongful conduct] plus the total value of any access devices. The value of an access device is the total value of the payments, allotments, benefits, money, goods, or other things of value that could be obtained, or the total value of funds that could be transferred, by use of the access device at the time of the violation. You may add together the various values of the food stamps, coupons, or access devices [used / transferred / acquired / altered / purchased / possessed / presented for redemption / transported] by the defendant over a period of 12 months when deciding whether the prosecutor has proved the amount required beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Committee on Model Criminal Jury Instructions solicits comment on the following proposal by January 1, 2022. Comments may be sent in writing to Samuel R. Smith, Reporter, Committee on Model Criminal Jury Instructions, Michigan Hall of Justice,
P.O. Box 30052, Lansing, MI 48909-7604, or electronically to MCrimJI@courts.mi.gov.
PROPOSED
The Committee proposes a new instruction, M Crim JI 35.12 [Cyberbullying / Aggravated Cyberbullying], for crimes charged under MCL 750.411x.
[NEW] M Crim JI 35.1 Cyberbullying / Aggravated Cyberbullying
- The defendant is charged with [cyberbullying / aggravated cyberbullying]. To prove this charge, the prosecutor must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
- First, that the defendant posted a message or statement about or to any other person in a public media forum used to conveyinformation to others, such as the internet.
- Second, that the message expressed an intent to commit violence against any other person and was intended to place any person in fear of bodily harm or death.
- Third, that the defendant intended to communicate a threat with the message or [he / she] knew that the message would be viewed as a threat.
[Use the following only where an aggravating element has been charged:]
- Fourth, that the defendant committed two or more separate non-continuous acts of harassing or intimidating behavior on different occasions.
- Fourth/Fifth, that the defendant’s actions in this case caused [(name complainant or other person) to suffer permanent, serious disfigurement, serious impairment of health, or serious impairment of a bodily function / the death of (decedent’s name)].