Opinion ID: 166399
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Discussing Reasonable Doubt

Text: 69 During voir dire the prosecutor made the following comments: 70 In a criminal case we have to prove the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In a civil case it's beyond a preponderance of evidence. Do you understand the distinctions? 71 . . . 72 And we can't tell you what reasonable doubt means. We can't define it for you. Defense can't define what beyond a reasonable doubt means. And the Court can't define it. 73 The instructions won't say beyond a shadow of a doubt or all doubt. The Instructions say beyond a reasonable doubt. 74 Tr. I at 121 (emphasis added) (similar comments at 125). Although Oklahoma law does not permit jury instructions on the meaning of reasonable doubt, Al-Mosawi v. State, 929 P.2d 270, 279 (Okla.Crim.App.1996), and an instruction defining reasonable doubt may deny due process if it misleads the jury about the burden the state carries, see Cage v. Louisiana, 498 U.S. 39, 41, 111 S.Ct. 328, 112 L.Ed.2d 339 (1990) (instructions equating reasonable doubt with grave uncertainty and actual substantial doubt violate due process), overruled on other grounds by Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 73 n. 4, 112 S.Ct. 475, 116 L.Ed.2d 385 (1991) (clarifying that standard of review for erroneous jury instructions is whether they had a reasonable likelihood of misleading the jury), not all definitions of reasonable doubt are misleading. The Supreme Court held in Victor v. Nebraska, 511 U.S. 1, 17, 114 S.Ct. 1239, 127 L.Ed.2d 583 (1994), that a jury instruction stating that a reasonable doubt is not a mere possible doubt did not likely mislead the jury because a reasonable doubt, at a minimum, is one based upon reason. A fanciful doubt is not a reasonable doubt. (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). Similarly, to state that beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean beyond a shadow of a doubt or all doubt was not a constitutional violation. 75