Opinion ID: 186274
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Appearance Instruction

Text: 8 Between Carr's arrest and his trial he gained weight, shaved his beard, and began to wear glasses. The Government therefore asked for and the district court gave the jury the following instruction: 9 A defendant's attempt to change his appearance after a crime has been committed does not create a presumption of guilt. An innocent person charged with a serious offense may resort to various means, both lawful and unlawful, to avoid prosecution. 10 On the other hand, you may consider evidence of the defendant's attempt to change his appearance as tending to prove the defendant's fear of being identified and therefore his consciousness of guilt. You are not required to do so. You should consider and weigh such evidence along with all of the other evidence in the case and give it the weight you think it deserves. 11 Carr argues this instruction created a presumption of guilt, the first sentence of the instruction to the contrary notwithstanding. The Government responds that a defendant's attempt to change his appearance is properly the subject of a jury instruction, citing United States v. Perkins, 937 F.2d 1397, 1403 (9th Cir.1991), and United States v. McKinley, 485 F.2d 1059, 1061 (D.C.Cir.1973). We review the district court's instruction for abuse of discretion. See United States v. White, 116 F.3d 903, 924 (D.C.Cir.1997); United States v. Williams, 113 F.3d 243, 246 (D.C.Cir.1997). 12 Obviously Carr could anticipate that witnesses would be called at trial to identify him as the robber. For whatever reason, Carr made profound alterations to his appearance before trial by gaining weight, shaving his heavy beard, and donning glasses. Almost every witness who was asked nonetheless identified Carr as the robber — and each such witness commented upon the change in his appearance. Because there was independent evidence indicating that the defendant ... changed his appearance, the jury could reasonably infer that he did so in order to avoid identification at trial and thereby evinced [a] consciousness of guilt. Perkins, 937 F.2d at 1403. Therefore, the district court's instruction that the jury may consider evidence of the defendant's attempt to change his appearance was founded in the record and was not an error. 13 On appeal, Carr's counsel points out — as trial counsel pointed out to the jury — there could be innocent explanations for the changes in Carr's appearance. Whether to credit those explanations is properly for the jury, however, not for this court.