Opinion ID: 2640143
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: instruction on the burden of proof

Text: Gallegos argues that the district court erred by instructing the jury that it was to presume he was not guilty until it was convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty. Gallegos argues that the court should have instructed that the jury was required to maintain the presumption of innocence unless it found the defendant guilty. Gallegos claims that by instructing the jury that it was required to presume his innocence until it was convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty, the court essentially shifted the burden of proof to the defendant to disprove his guilt. According to the defendant, the use of the term until indicated an expectancy that at some point, the jury should find the defendant guilty. The wording of the instruction therefore focused on when, not if, the defendant would be convicted.