UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 22-80144-CR-SMITH/MAYNARD(s)(s)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

JOFF STENN WROY PHILOSSAINT,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

DEFENDANT PHILOSSAINT’S PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS

The defendant, Joff Stenn Wroy Philossaint, through undersigned counsel, 

respectfully requests that the Court give the following Jury Instructions at trial in 

this matter. Defendant also requests that he be allowed to propose such additional 

instructions as become appropriate based upon the testimony and evidence at trial, 

and that it be informed prior to closing arguments which instructions the Court will 

accept.

Respectfully submitted,

LAW OFFICES OF IAN GOLDSTEIN P.A.

Counsel for Defendant Philossaint

330 Clematis Street, Suite 209

West Palm Beach, FL 33401

Tel: (561) 600-0950

Email: ian@iangoldsteinlaw.com

/s/ Ian J. Goldstein

IAN J. GOLDSTEIN, ESQUIRE

Florida Bar No. 0085219

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 1 of 14
B1

Face Page – Introduction

Members of the Jury:

It’s my duty to instruct you on the rules of law that you must use in deciding 

this case. After I’ve completed these instructions, you will go to the jury room and 

begin your discussions – what we call your deliberations.

You must decide whether the Government has proved the specific facts 

necessary to find the Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 2 of 14
B2.1

The Duty to Follow Instructions And the Presumption of Innocence

Your decision must be based only on the evidence presented here. You must 

not be influenced in any way by either sympathy for or prejudice against the 

Defendant or the Government.

You must follow the law as I explain it – even if you do not agree with the 

law – and you must follow all of my instructions as a whole. You must not single 

out or disregard any of the Court's instructions on the law.

The indictment or formal charge against a defendant isn’t evidence of guilt. 

The law presumes every defendant is innocent. The Defendant does not have to 

prove his innocence or produce any evidence at all. The Government must prove 

guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If it fails to do so, you must find the Defendant 

not guilty.

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 3 of 14
B2.2

The Duty to Follow Instructions and the Presumption Of Innocence

When a Defendant Does Not Testify

Your decision must be based only on the evidence presented during the trial. 

You must not be influenced in any way by either sympathy for or prejudice against 

the Defendant or the Government.

You must follow the law as I explain it – even if you do not agree with the 

law – and you must follow all of my instructions as a whole. You must not single 

out or disregard any of the Court's instructions on the law.

The indictment or formal charge against a Defendant isn’t evidence of guilt. 

The law presumes every Defendant is innocent. The Defendant does not have to 

prove his innocence or produce any evidence at all. A Defendant does not have to 

testify, and if the Defendant chose not to testify, you cannot consider that in any 

way while making your decision. The Government must prove guilt beyond a 

reasonable doubt. If it fails to do so, you must find the Defendant not guilty.

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 4 of 14
B3

Definition of “Reasonable Doubt”

The Government's burden of proof is heavy, but it doesn’t have to prove a 

Defendant's guilt beyond all possible doubt. The Government's proof only has to 

exclude any “reasonable doubt” concerning the Defendant's guilt.

A “reasonable doubt” is a real doubt, based on your reason and common 

sense after you’ve carefully and impartially considered all the evidence in the case.

“Proof beyond a reasonable doubt” is proof so convincing that you would be 

willing to rely and act on it without hesitation in the most important of your own 

affairs. If you are convinced that the Defendant has been proved guilty beyond a 

reasonable doubt, say so. If you are not convinced, say so.

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 5 of 14
B4

Consideration of Direct and Circumstantial Evidence;

Argument of Counsel; Comments by the Court

As I said before, you must consider only the evidence that I have admitted in 

the case. Evidence includes the testimony of witnesses and the exhibits admitted. 

But, anything the lawyers say is not evidence and isn’t binding on you.

You shouldn’t assume from anything I’ve said that I have any opinion about 

any factual issue in this case. Except for my instructions to you on the law, you 

should disregard anything I may have said during the trial in arriving at your own 

decision about the facts.

Your own recollection and interpretation of the evidence is what matters.

In considering the evidence you may use reasoning and common sense to 

make deductions and reach conclusions. You shouldn’t be concerned about 

whether the evidence is direct or circumstantial.

“Direct evidence” is the testimony of a person who asserts that he or she has 

actual knowledge of a fact, such as an eyewitness.

“Circumstantial evidence” is proof of a chain of facts and circumstances that 

tend to prove or disprove a fact. There’s no legal difference in the weight you may 

give to either direct or circumstantial evidence.

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 6 of 14
B5

Credibility of Witnesses

When I say you must consider all the evidence, I don’t mean that you must 

accept all the evidence as true or accurate. You should decide whether you believe 

what each witness had to say, and how important that testimony was. In making 

that decision you may believe or disbelieve any witness, in whole or in part. The 

number of witnesses testifying concerning a particular point doesn’t necessarily 

matter.

To decide whether you believe any witness I suggest that you ask yourself a 

few questions:

• Did the witness impress you as one who was telling the truth?

• Did the witness have any particular reason not to tell the truth?

• Did the witness have a personal interest in the outcome of the 

case?

• Did the witness seem to have a good memory?

• Did the witness have the opportunity and ability to accurately 

observe the things he or she testified about?

• Did the witness appear to understand the questions clearly and 

answer them directly?

• Did the witness's testimony differ from other testimony or other 

evidence?

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 7 of 14
O120

Procurement of Citizenship

or Naturalization Unlawfully

18 U.S.C. § 1425

It’s a Federal crime for any person to knowingly procure or attempt to 

procure, contrary to law, the naturalization of any person.

The Defendant can be found guilty of a violation of section 1425(a), only if 

all the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1) the Defendant knowingly procured

(2) contrary to law

(3) the naturalization of any person

“Naturalization” means conferring citizenship on a person after his or 

her birth.

A defendant acts “contrary to law” if the defendant knowingly makes 

a false statement under oath in a proceeding or matter relating to 

naturalization.

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 8 of 14
Theory of Defense Instruction

[to be submitted separately, if appropriate]

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 9 of 14
S17

Good-Faith Defense

“Good faith” is a complete defense to a charge that requires intent to 

defraud. A defendant isn’t required to prove good faith. The Government must 

prove intent to defraud beyond a reasonable doubt.

An honestly held opinion or an honestly formed belief cannot be fraudulent 

intent – even if the opinion or belief is mistaken. Similarly, evidence of a mistake 

in judgment, an error in management, or carelessness can’t establish fraudulent 

intent.

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 10 of 14
B9.2

On or About a Particular Date; Knowingly

You’ll see that the indictment charges that a crime was committed “on or 

about” a certain date. The Government doesn’t have to prove that the offense 

occurred on an exact date. The Government only has to prove beyond a reasonable 

doubt that the crime was committed on a date reasonably close to the date alleged.

The word “knowingly” means that an act was done voluntarily and 

intentionally and not because of a mistake or by accident.

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 11 of 14
B10.1

Caution: Punishment

(Single Defendant, Single Count)

I caution you that the Defendant is on trial only for the specific crime 

charged in the indictment. You’re here to determine from the evidence in this case 

whether the Defendant is guilty or not guilty of that specific crime.

You must never consider punishment in any way to decide whether the 

Defendant is guilty or not guilty. If you find the Defendant guilty, the punishment 

is for the Judge alone to decide later.

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 12 of 14
B11

Duty to Deliberate

Your verdict, whether guilty or not guilty, must be unanimous – in other 

words, you must all agree. Your deliberations are secret, and you’ll never have to 

explain your verdict to anyone.

Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only after fully 

considering the evidence with the other jurors. So you must discuss the case with 

one another and try to reach an agreement. While you’re discussing the case, don’t 

hesitate to reexamine your own opinion and change your mind if you become 

convinced that you were wrong. But don’t give up your honest beliefs just because 

others think differently or because you simply want to get the case over with.

Remember that, in a very real way, you’re judges – judges of the facts. Your 

only interest is to seek the truth from the evidence in the case.

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 13 of 14
B12

Verdict

When you get to the jury room, choose one of your members to act as 

foreperson. The foreperson will direct your deliberations and will speak for you in 

court.

A verdict form has been prepared for your convenience.

[Explain verdict]

Take the verdict form with you to the jury room. When you’ve all agreed on 

the verdict, your foreperson must fill in the form, sign it, date it, and carry it. Then 

you’ll return it to the courtroom.

If you wish to communicate with me at any time, please write down your 

message or question and give it to the marshal. The marshal will bring it to me and 

I’ll respond as promptly as possible – either in writing or by talking to you in the

courtroom. But I caution you not to tell me how many jurors have voted one way 

or the other at that time.

Case 9:22-cr-80144-RS Document 185 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/01/2023 Page 14 of 14