Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-03407/USCOURTS-cand-3_13-cv-03407-7/pdf.json

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

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOYCE HUTTON,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF BERKELEY POLICE 

DEPARTMENT, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 13-cv-03407-JCS 

FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

Dated: March 9, 2015

______________________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 1 of 20
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 1

DUTY OF JURY

Members of the Jury: Now that you have heard all of the evidence and the arguments of 

the attorneys, it is my duty to instruct you as to the law of the case. Each of you has received a 

copy of these instructions that you may take with you to the jury room to consult during your 

deliberations.

You must not infer from these instructions or from anything I may say or do as indicating 

that I have an opinion regarding the evidence or what your verdict should be.

It is your duty to find the facts from all the evidence in the case. To those facts you will 

apply the law as I give it to you. You must follow the law as I give it to you whether you agree 

with it or not. And you must not be influenced by any personal likes or dislikes, opinions, 

prejudices, or sympathy. That means that you must decide the case solely on the evidence before 

you. You will recall that you took an oath to do so. 

In following my instructions, you must follow all of them and not single out some and 

ignore others; they are all important.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 2 of 20
3

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 2

CLAIMS AND DEFENSES

Plaintiff Joyce Hutton has sued City of Berkeley Police Officer Lucero on the basis of an 

allegedly unlawful traffic stop that occurred on July 10, 2012, conducted by Officer Lucero. 

Defendants contend the traffic stop was lawful because Plaintiff had driven too closely behind 

Officer Lucero’s vehicle and evaded arrest. They also assert the stop was lawful based on an 

outstanding warrant that matched Plaintiff’s license plate number, even though the name on the 

warrant was for a man. Plaintiff, on the other hand, claims that Officer Lucero conducted the 

traffic stop without reasonable suspicion, in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the United 

States Constitution because Plaintiff had not committed a traffic violation or evaded arrest, and to 

the extent Officer Lucero conducted the stop on the basis of the outstanding warrant, she should 

have stopped the inquiry and allowed Plaintiff to proceed as soon as she saw that Plaintiff was a 

woman. 

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 3 of 20
4

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 3

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.

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

it.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 4 of 20
5

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 4

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 parties have agreed.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 5 of 20
6

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 5

WHAT IS NOT EVIDENCE

In reaching your verdict, you may consider only the testimony and exhibits received into 

evidence. Certain things are not evidence, and you may not consider them in deciding what the 

facts are. I will list them for you:

(1) Arguments and statements by lawyers are not evidence. The lawyers are not witnesses. 

What they have said in their opening statements, closing arguments, and at other times is intended 

to help you interpret the evidence, but it is not evidence. If the facts as you remember them differ 

from the way the lawyers have stated them, your memory of them controls.

(2) Questions and objections by lawyers are not evidence. Attorneys have a duty to their 

clients to object when they believe a question is improper under the rules of evidence. You should 

not be influenced by the objection or by the court’s ruling on it.

(3) Testimony that has been excluded or stricken, or that you have been instructed to 

disregard, is not evidence and must not be considered. In addition, sometimes testimony and 

exhibits are received only for a limited purpose; when I have given a limiting instruction, you 

must follow it.

(4) Anything you may have seen or heard when the court was not in session is not 

evidence. You are to decide the case solely on the evidence received at the trial.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 6 of 20
7

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 6

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 heard 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 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 7 of 20
8

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 7

RULING ON OBJECTIONS

As I instructed you at the outset of the case, 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. Whenever I sustained an objection to a question, you must ignore the question and 

must not guess what the answer might have been. Similarly, if I ordered that evidence be stricken 

from the record and that you disregard or ignore the evidence, you must not consider the evidence 

that I told you to disregard.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 8 of 20
9

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 8

CREDIBILITY OF WITNESS

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 witness has said, or part of it, or 

none of it. Proof of a fact does not necessarily depend on the number of witnesses who testify 

about 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’s memory; 

(3) the witness’s manner while testifying; 

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

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

(6) the reasonableness of the witness’s 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 about it.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 9 of 20
10

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 9

IMPEACHMENT EVIDENCE—WITNESS

The evidence that a witness lied under oath on a prior occasion, may be considered, along 

with all other evidence, in deciding whether or not to believe the witness and how much weight to 

give to the testimony of the witness and for no other purpose.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 10 of 20
11

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 10

SECTION 1983 CLAIM – INTRODUCTORY INSTRUCTION

The plaintiff brings her claim under the federal statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which provides 

that any person or persons who, under color of law, deprives another of any rights, privileges, or 

immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States shall be liable to the injured 

party.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 11 of 20
12

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 11

SECTION 1983 CLAIM 

ELEMENTS AND BURDEN OF PROOF

In order to prevail on her § 1983 claim against Officer Lucero, the Plaintiff must prove 

each of the following elements by a preponderance of the evidence:

1. Officer Lucero acted under color of law; and

2. The acts of Officer Lucero deprived the Plaintiff of her particular rights under the United 

States Constitution as explained in later instructions.

A person acts “under color of law” when the person acts or purports to act in the

performance of official duties under any state, county, or municipal law, ordinance, or regulation. 

The parties have stipulated that Officer Lucero acted under color of law.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 12 of 20
13

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 12

PARTICULAR RIGHTS – FOURTH AMENDMENT –UNREASONABLE

TRAFFIC STOP OF PERSON

Under the Fourth Amendment, a seizure of a person for an investigatory traffic stop must 

be reasonable. An investigatory traffic stop is reasonable if, under all of the circumstances known 

to the officer at the time:

1. the officer had a reasonable suspicion that the person who was subject to the 

investigatory stop was engaged in a traffic violation or was evading arrest; or

2. the officer had a reasonable suspicion that the person who was subject to the 

investigatory stop was the individual named in an outstanding warrant linked to the vehicle; and

3. the length and scope of the seizure was reasonable.

“Reasonable suspicion” is an objectively reasonable belief based on specific and articulable facts. 

If you find that Officer Lucero had reasonable suspicion based on her belief that Plaintiff 

had followed too closely or evaded arrest, the stop was lawful and you must find in favor of 

Defendants on Plaintiff’s claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. If you find by a preponderance of the 

evidence that Officer Lucero did not have reasonable suspicion based on her belief that Plaintiff 

followed too closely or evaded arrest, you must find in favor of Plaintiff because Officer Lucero 

had a duty to discontinue the inquiry when she realized that Plaintiff was a woman and therefore 

she could not reasonably have been the individual named in the warrant.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 13 of 20
14

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 13

CAUSATION

In order to prevail on her claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Plaintiff must establish by the 

preponderance of the evidence that the traffic stop conducted by Officer Lucero was a substantial 

factor in causing Plaintiff’s injury. A substantial factor in causing harm is a factor that a 

reasonable person would consider to have contributed to the harm. It must be more than a remote 

or trivial factor. It does not have to be the only cause of the harm.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 14 of 20
15

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

DAMAGES.

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 14

COMPENSATORY DAMAGES – PROOF

It is the duty of the Court to instruct you about the measure of damages. By instructing you 

on damages, the Court does not mean to suggest for which party your verdict should be rendered.

If you find for the plaintiff, you must determine the plaintiff’s damages. The plaintiff has 

the burden of proving damages by a preponderance of the evidence. Damages means the amount 

of money that will reasonably and fairly compensate the plaintiff for any injury you find was

caused by the defendant. You should consider the following:

The emotional pain and suffering experienced and which with reasonable probability will 

be experienced in the future.

The reasonable value of any property that plaintiff lost.

It is for you to determine what damages, if any, have been proved.

Your award must be based upon evidence and not upon speculation, guesswork or 

conjecture.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 15 of 20
16

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 15

PUNITIVE DAMAGES

If you find for the plaintiff, you may, but are not required to, award punitive damages.

The purposes of punitive damages are to punish a defendant and to deter similar acts in the future. 

Punitive damages may not be awarded to compensate a plaintiff. 

The plaintiff has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that punitive 

damages should be awarded, and, if so, the amount of any such damages.

You may award punitive damages only if you find that Officer Lucero’s conduct that 

harmed Hutton was malicious, oppressive or in reckless disregard of the Hutton’s rights. Conduct 

is malicious if it is accompanied by ill will, or spite, or if it is for the purpose of injuring the 

plaintiff. Conduct is in reckless disregard of the plaintiff’s rights if, under the circumstances, it 

reflects complete indifference to the plaintiff’s safety or rights, or if the defendant acts in the face 

of a perceived risk that its actions will violate the plaintiff’s rights under federal law. An act or 

omission is oppressive if the defendant injures or damages or otherwise violates the rights of the 

plaintiff with unnecessary harshness or severity, such as by the misuse or abuse of authority or 

power or by the taking advantage of some weakness or disability or misfortune of the plaintiff.

If you find that punitive damages are appropriate, you must use reason in setting the 

amount. Punitive damages, if any, should be in an amount sufficient to fulfill their purposes but 

should not reflect bias, prejudice or sympathy toward any party. In considering the amount of any 

punitive damages, consider the degree of reprehensibility of the defendant’s conduct.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 16 of 20
17

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 16

DUTY TO DELIBERATE

When you begin your deliberations, you should elect one member of the jury as your 

presiding juror. That person will preside over the deliberations and speak for you here in court.

You will then discuss the case with your fellow jurors to reach agreement if you can do so. 

Your verdict must be unanimous.

Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but you should do so only after you have 

considered all of the evidence, discussed it fully with the other jurors, and listened to the views of 

your fellow jurors.

Do not hesitate to change your opinion if the discussion persuades you that you should. Do 

not come to a decision simply because other jurors think it is right.

It is important that you attempt to reach a unanimous verdict but, of course, only if each of 

you can do so after having made your own conscientious decision. Do not change an honest belief 

about the weight and effect of the evidence simply to reach a verdict. 

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 17 of 20
18

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 17

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE – CONDUCT OF THE JURY

Because you must base your verdict only on the evidence received in the case and on these 

instructions, I remind you that you must not be exposed to any other information about the case or 

to the issues it involves. Except for discussing the case with your fellow jurors during your 

deliberations:

Do not communicate with anyone in any way and do not let anyone else communicate with 

you in any way about the merits of the case or anything to do with it. This includes discussing the 

case in person, in writing, by phone or electronic means, via email, text messaging, or any Internet 

chat room, blog, website or other feature. This applies to communicating with your family 

members, your employer, the media or press, and the people involved in the trial. If you are asked 

or approached in any way about your jury service or anything about this case, you must respond 

that you have been ordered not to discuss the matter and to report the contact to the court.

Do not read, watch, or listen to any news or media accounts or commentary about the case 

or anything to do with it; do not do any research, such as consulting dictionaries, searching the 

Internet or using other reference materials; and do not make any investigation or in any other way 

try to learn about the case on your own.

The law requires these restrictions to ensure the parties have a fair trial based on the same 

evidence that each party has had an opportunity to address. A juror who violates these restrictions 

jeopardizes the fairness of these proceedings, and a mistrial could result that would require the 

entire trial process to start over. If any juror is exposed to any outside information, please notify 

the court immediately.

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 18 of 20
19

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 18

COMMUNICATION WITH COURT

If it becomes necessary during your deliberations to communicate with me, you may send 

a note through the Courtroom Deputy, Ms. Karen Hom, signed by your presiding juror or by one 

or more members of the jury. No member of the jury should ever attempt to communicate with me 

except by a signed writing; I will communicate with any member of the jury on anything 

concerning the case only in writing, or here in open court. If you send out a question, I will consult 

with the parties before answering it, which may take some time. You may continue your 

deliberations while waiting for the answer to any question. Remember that you are not to tell 

anyone – including me – how the jury stands, numerically or otherwise, until after you have 

reached a unanimous verdict or have been discharged. Do not disclose any vote count in any note 

to the court. 

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 19 of 20
20

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

JURY INSTRUCTION NO. 19

RETURN OF VERDICT

A verdict form has been prepared for you. After you have reached unanimous agreement 

on a verdict, your presiding juror will fill in the form that has been given to you, sign and date it, 

and advise the court that you are ready to return to the courtroom. 

Case 3:13-cv-03407-JCS Document 98 Filed 03/09/15 Page 20 of 20