Opinion ID: 492352
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 8

Heading: jury instruction on witness intimidation

Text: 46 At trial, the government presented evidence that Gonzalez attempted to intimidate one of the government's witnesses. The trial court instructed the jury accordingly: 47 Evidence that a defendant attempted to dissuade a witness from testifying or persuade a witness to testify falsely by threats, intimidation, or other means may be considered by you, along with the other evidence in the case, as a circumstance tending to show defendant's consciousness of guilt. You are not to consider this evidence for any other purpose. 48 Such evidence is not sufficient in itself to prove guilt. It is for you to determine whether you believe the evidence and, if you do, what weight and significance you accord it. 49 Gonzalez challenges the instruction as improper and prejudicial. 50 We find no merit in Gonzalez's challenge. The trial judge has latitude in giving his instructions to the jury. Our responsibility is to determine whether the charge, taken as a whole and viewed in the light of the evidence, fairly and adequately submits the issues in the case to the jury. 49 The defendant's attempted intimidation of a witness is relevant to his consciousness of guilt and an instruction on this point is proper when sufficiently supported by the evidence. 50 We find no abuse of discretion in the giving of the instruction.