Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-00958/USCOURTS-cand-3_04-cv-00958-19/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEPHANIE HARRINGTON,

Plaintiff,

 v.

POLICE OFFICER DEBBIE PEECOOK and

POLICE OFFICER BRETT POTTER, in their

individual and official capacities,

Defendants.

 /

No. C 04-00958 JSW

PRELIMINARY JURY

INSTRUCTIONS

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 1 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

DUTY OF JURY

Ladies and gentlemen: You are now the jury in this case, and I want to take a few minutes

to tell you something about your duties as jurors and to give you some instructions. At the end of

the trial, I will give you more detailed instructions. Those instructions will control your

deliberations.

You should not take anything I may say or do during the trial as indicating what I think

of the evidence or what your verdict should be.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 2 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHTS — ELEMENTS

AND BURDEN OF PROOF

On the plaintiff’s claim for the use of excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment

to the United States Constitution, the plaintiff has the burden of proving each of the following

elements by a preponderance of the evidence:

1. the acts or omissions of the defendants were intentional;

2. the defendants acted under color of law; and

3. the acts or omissions of the defendants were the cause of the deprivation of the

plaintiff' s rights protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 3 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4

EXCESSIVE FORCE—UNREASONABLE SEIZURE—LAWFUL ARREST

The plaintiff claims the defendants, by using excessive force in making a lawful arrest,

deprived plaintiff of the Fourth Amendment constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable

seizure.

A law enforcement officer has the right to use such force as is reasonably necessary under

the circumstances to make a lawful arrest. An unreasonable seizure occurs when a law enforcement

officer uses excessive force in making a lawful arrest. In deciding whether excessive force was

used, you should consider the totality of the circumstances at the time. The reasonableness of a

particular use of force must be judged objectively from the information available at the time from

the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.

Whether force is reasonably necessary or excessive is measured by the force a reasonable

and prudent law enforcement officer would use under the circumstances.

Some of the things you may want to consider in determining whether the defendant used

excessive force are the severity of the crime at issue, whether the plaintiff posed a reasonable threat

to the safety of the officer or others, and whether the plaintiff was actively resisting detention or

attempting to escape.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 4 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

5

NO SPECIFIC INTENT REQUIRED

It is not necessary to find that the defendant had any specific intent to deprive the plaintiff

of her constitutional rights, or that he acted with malice or ill in order to find for the plaintiff. The

plaintiff is entitled to relief if the defendant intended the actions which resulted in a violation of her

constitutional rights. Whether the defendant acted with subjective good faith is irrelevant, and

plaintiff need not prove that the defendant officers had an evil heart.

Because you are to determine whether the officers’ use of force was objectively reasonable,

you should disregard the officer’s underlying intent or motivation, regardless of whether that intent

or motivation was good or evil.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 5 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

6

REASONABLENESS OF FORCE USED IF IT AGGRAVATES PRE-EXISTING

CONDITION UNKNOWN TO OFFICER

What would otherwise be considered reasonable force does not become excessive force

simply because the force aggravates a pre-existing condition which was unknown to the officer at the

time the force was used.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 6 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

7

LIABILITY FOR ONE OFFICER’S FAILURE TO INTERCEDE TO PREVENT

UNREASONABLE FORCE BY OTHER OFFICER

An officer has a duty to intercede when a fellow officer violates the constitutional rights of

a suspect. An officer who fails to intercede if another officer uses unreasonable force in the course

of an arrest would also be responsible for subjecting the suspect to a deprivation of her Fourth

Amendment Rights. 

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 7 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

8

CLAIMS AND DEFENSES

To help you follow the evidence, I will give you a brief summary of the positions of the

parties:

The plaintiff, Stephanie Harrington, claims that Defendants Debbie Peecook and Brent

Potter, both Officers in the City of Napa Police Department, used unreasonable and excessive force

against her when they handcuffed her and escorted her outside her house to a waiting patrol car,

without the use of her crutches. The incident happened on the night of May 25, 2003, while the

defendant officers were lawfully arresting Plaintiff for alleged domestic violence against her

husband. 

Plaintiff also claims that Defendant Peecook acted with reckless indifference to Plaintiff’s

rights, and that Defendant Potter failed to intercede to stop Officer Peecook. Plaintiff brings claims

for violation of her right to be free from excessive force under the Fourth Amendment to the United

States Constitution.

The defendants, Officers Peecook and Potter, deny those claims, and contend that the force

they used, if any, against Plaintiff was reasonable under the circumstances.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 8 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

9

WHAT IS EVIDENCE

The evidence you are to consider in deciding what the facts are consists of:

(1) the sworn testimony of any witness;

(2) the exhibits which are received into evidence; and

(3) any facts to which the lawyers stipulate.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 9 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

10

WHAT IS NOT EVIDENCE

The following things are not evidence, and you must not consider them as evidence in

deciding the facts of this case:

(1) statements and arguments of the attorneys;

(2) questions and objections of the attorneys;

(3) testimony that I instruct you to disregard; and 

(4) anything you may see or hear when the court is not in session even if what

you see or hear is done or said by one of the parties or by one of the witnesses.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 10 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

11

EVIDENCE FOR LIMITED PURPOSE

Some evidence may be admitted for a limited purpose only. When I instruct you that an

item of evidence has been admitted for a limited purpose, you must consider it only for that limited

purpose and for no other.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 11 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

12

DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Evidence may be direct or circumstantial. Direct evidence is direct proof of a fact, such

as testimony by a witness about what that witness personally saw or hear or did. Circumstantial

evidence is proof of one or more facts from which you could find another fact. You should consider

both kinds of evidence. The law makes no distinction between the weight to be given to either direct

or circumstantial evidence. It is for you to decide how much weight to give to any evidence.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 12 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

13

RULING ON OBJECTIONS

There are rules of evidence that control what can be received into evidence. When a lawyer

asks a question or offers an exhibit into evidence and a lawyer on the other side thinks that it is not

permitted by the rules of evidence, that lawyer may object. If I overrule the objection, the question

may be answered or the exhibit received. If I sustain the objection, the question cannot be answered,

and the exhibit cannot be received. Whenever I sustain an objection to a question, you must ignore

the question and must not guess what the answer might have been.

Sometimes I may order that evidence be stricken from the record and that you disregard or

ignore the evidence. That means that when you are deciding the case, you must not consider the

evidence that I told you to disregard.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 13 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

14

CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES

In deciding the facts in this case, you may have to decide which testimony to believe and

which testimony not to believe. You may believe everything a witnesses says, or part of it, or none

of it.

In considering the testimony of any witness, you may take into account:

(1) the opportunity and ability of the witness to see or hear or know the things testified

to;

(2) the witness’ memory;

(3) the witness’ manner while testifying;

(4) the witness’ interest in the outcome of the case and any bias or prejudice;

(5) whether other evidence contradicted the witness’ testimony;

(6) the reasonableness of the witness’ testimony in light of all the evidence; and

(7) any other factors that bear on believability.

The weight of the evidence as to a fact does not necessarily depend on the number of

witnesses who testify.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 14 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

15

CREDIBILITY OF WITNESSES (POLICE)

The testimony of a law enforcement officer should be considered by you just as any other

evidence in this case, and in evaluating the officer’s credibility you should use the same guidelines

which you apply to the testimony of any witness. You should not give either greater or lesser

credence to the testimony of a witness merely because he or she is a law enforcement officer.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 15 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

16

CONDUCT OF THE JURY

I will now say a few words about your conduct as jurors.

First, you are not to discuss this case with anyone, including your fellow jurors, members

of your family, people involved in the trial, or anyone else, nor are you allowed to permit others to

discuss the case with you. If anyone approaches you and tries to talk to you about the case, please

let me know about it immediately;

Second, do not read any news stories or articles or listen to any radio or television reports

about the case or about anyone who has anything to do with it;

Third, do not do any research, such as consulting dictionaries, searching the Internet or

using other reference materials, and do not make any investigation about the case on your own;

Fourth, if you need to communicate with me simply give a signed note to the clerk to give

to me; and

Fifth, do not make up your mind about what the verdict should be until after you have gone

to the jury room to decide that case and you and your fellow jurors have discussed the evidence.

Keep an open mind until then.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 16 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

17

NO TRANSCRIPT AVAILABLE TO JURY

At the end of the trial, you will have to make your decision based on what you recall of the

evidence. You will not have a transcript of the trial. I urge you to pay close attention to the

testimony as it is given.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 17 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

18

TAKING NOTES

If you wish, you may take notes to help you remember what witnesses said. If you do take

notes, please keep them to yourself until you and your fellow jurors go to the jury room to decide the

case. Do not let note taking distract you so that you do not hear other answers by witnesses. When

you leave, your notes should be left in the jury room.

Whether or not you take notes, you should rely on your own memory of what was said.

Notes are only to assist your memory. You should not be overly influenced by the notes.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 18 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

19

OUTLINE OF TRIAL

The next phase of the trial will now begin. First, each side may make an opening

statement. An opening statement is not evidence. It is simply an outline to help you understand

what that party expects the evidence will show. A party is not required to make an opening

statement.

The plaintiff will then present evidence, and counsel for the defendant may cross-examine.

Then the defendant may present evidence, and counsel for the plaintiff may cross-examine.

After the evidence has been presented, I will instruct you on the law that applies to the case

and the attorneys will make closing arguments.

After that, you will go to the jury room to deliberate on your verdict.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 19 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

20

DEPOSITIONS

One or both of the parties may present excerpts of videotaped depositions in their opening

statements. A deposition is the sworn testimony of a witness taken before trial. The witness is

placed under oath to tell the truth and lawyers for each party may ask questions. The questions and

answers are recorded.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 20 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

21

BURDEN OF PROOF—PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE

When a party has the burden of proof on any claim or affirmative defense by a

preponderance of the evidence, it means you must be persuaded by the evidence that the claim or

affirmative defense is more probably true than not true. Put another way, “preponderance of the

evidence” means evidence that has more convincing force than that opposed to it. If the evidence

is so evenly balanced that you are unable to say that the evidence on either side of an issue

predominates, your finding on that issue must e against the party who had the burden of proving it.

You should base your decision on all of the evidence, regardless of which party presented

it.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 21 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

22

BENCH CONFERENCES AND RECESSES

From time to time during the trial, it may become necessary for me to talk with the

attorneys out of the hearing of the jury, either by having a conference at the bench when the jury is

present in the courtroom, or by calling a recess. Please understand that while you are waiting, we

are working. The purpose of these conferences is not to keep relevant information from you, but to

decide how certain evidence is to be treated under the rules of evidence and to avoid confusion and

error.

We will, of course, do what we can to keep the number and length of these conferences to

a minimum. I may not always grant an attorney’s request for a conference. Do not consider my

granting or denying a request for a conference as any indication of my opinion of the case or of what

your verdict should be.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 22 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

23

STIPULATIONS OF FACT

The parties have agreed to certain facts that have been stated to you. You should therefore

treat these facts as having been proved.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 23 of 24
U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

24

IMPEACHMENT BY CONVICTION OF CRIME

The evidence that a witness has been convicted of a crime may be considered only as it

may affect the believability of that witness and for no other purpose.

Case 3:04-cv-00958-JSW Document 131 Filed 08/10/05 Page 24 of 24