Opinion ID: 785013
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Alexander's name in the Jury Instructions

Text: 28 Finally, the district court did not somehow create a mandatory presumption that Alexander was a co-conspirator by including Alexander's name in the jury instructions. Alexander's name was only mentioned in the jury instructions when Count 1 of the superseding indictment was read. The district court never mentioned any type of presumption, and it clearly mentioned that the burden of proof was on the Government when the court stated [t]he indictment ... against the defendant is not evidence of guilt. The defendant is presumed innocent by the law, and the presumption of innocence is always there.... The defendant need not prove anything.... The United States has the burden of proving the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.... J.A. at 778-79. The district court therefore did not err by reading Alexander's name in the indictment with the jury instructions.