Opinion ID: 2185352
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: whether the trial court erred in refusing to give a jury instruction requested by christopherson.

Text: Christopherson asked the trial court to add a paragraph to the jury instruction relating to State's burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Christopherson wanted to add a paragraph that read: In considering the standard of reasonable doubt consider that the lesser standard of clear and convincing evidence is defined as follows: Its technical meaning has been expressed as the witnesses must be found to be credible, that the facts to which they have testified are distinctly remembered and the details thereof narrated exactly and in due order, and that their testimony is so clear, direct and weighty and convincing as to enable either a judge or jury to come to a clear conviction without hesitancy, or the truth of the precise facts in issue. The trial court refused to add that language and instead gave the standard criminal pattern jury instruction on reasonable doubt. The trial judge concluded that the addition of the above quoted language to the instruction would potentially confuse the jurors. We have consistently held that jury instructions are sufficient where, as a whole, they correctly state the law. See, e.g., State v. Martin, 449 N.W.2d 29 (S.D. 1989). We have also approved of the use of the criminal pattern jury instructions. See, e.g., State v. Andrews, 393 N.W.2d 76 (S.D.1986). Christopherson has not contended that the reasonable doubt jury instruction given by the judge was erroneous as to the law. He simply argues that the judge should have told the jury about the clear and convincing evidence standard. This was a criminal case and the reasonable doubt standard applied. Christopherson has not shown why it was important for the jury to understand the clear and convincing evidence standard. The trial court correctly concluded that an explanation of the clear and convincing evidence standard was unnecessary and might confuse the jury about which standard to apply. The trial court did not err in refusing to give the instruction requested by Christopherson.