AGGRAVATED ASSAULT-SERIOUS BODILY INJURY N.J.S.A.2C:12-1b(1)
AGGRAVATED ASSAULT - SERIOUS BODILY INJURY. Model jury charge
(N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1b(1)
In Count _____of the indictment, the defendant(s) is (are) charged with the crimeof aggravated assault in that (he/she/they) allegedly on ________in the ________
(Date) (Municipality)
(READ PERTINENT LANGUAGE OF INDICTMENT)
The defendant(s) is (are) accused of violating a section of our State statutes that reads as follows:
A
person is guilty of aggravated assault if he . . . (a)ttempts to cause
serious bodily injury to another, or causes such injury purposely or
knowingly or under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the
value of human life recklessly causes such injury.
Under this statute, the defendant(s) can be found guilty if (he/she/they) EITHER caused serious bodily injury to another OR attempted to cause serious bodily injury to another.
To
find the defendant(s) guilty of aggravated assault for causing serious
bodily injury to another, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt
each of the following elements:
1. That the defendant(s) caused serious bodily injury to another; and
2. That
the defendant(s) acted purposely or knowingly or acted recklessly under
circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human
life.
The
first element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is
that the defendant(s) caused serious bodily injury to another.
Serious
bodily injury means bodily injury which creates a substantial risk of
death or which causes serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted
loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.
The
second element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is
that the defendant(s) acted purposely or knowingly or acted recklessly
under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of
human life.
A person acts purposely with respect to the result of his/her conduct if it is his/her conscious object to cause such a result. A person acts purposely if he/she acts with design, with a specific intent, with a particular object or purpose, or if he/she means to do what he/she does (e.g., I did it on purpose).
A person acts knowingly with respect to the result of his/her conduct if he/she is aware that it is practically certain that his/her conduct will cause such a result.
A person acts recklessly with respect to the result of his/her conduct if he/she consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the result will occur from his/her
conduct. The risk must be of such a nature and degree that, considering
the nature and purpose of the actors conduct and the circumstances
known to the actor, its disregard involves a gross deviation from the
standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the actors
situation. One is said to act recklessly if one acts with recklessness,
with scorn for the consequences, heedlessly, fool-hardily.
The
phrase under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the
value of human life does not focus on the state of mind of the actor,
but rather on the circumstances under which you find that he/she
acted. If, in light of all the evidence, you find that the conduct of
the defendant(s) resulted in a probability as opposed to a mere
possibility of serious bodily injury, then you may find that
(he/she/they) acted under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference
to the value of human life.[1]
In
determining whether the defendant(s) acted purposely or knowingly or
acted recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to
the value of human life, you may consider the nature of the act(s)
itself(themselves) and the severity of the resulting injury (injuries).
(NOTE:
When the actual victim is one other than the intended victim, the jury
should be instructed that it is immaterial that the actual victim was
not the intended victim).
If
you find that the State has proved each element beyond a reasonable
doubt, then you must find the defendant(s) guilty. All jurors do not
have to agree unanimously concerning which form of serious bodily injury
aggravated assault is present so long as all believe that it was one
form of serious bodily injury or the other. However, for a defendant to
be guilty of serious bodily injury aggravated assault, all jurors must
agree that the defendant either knowingly or purposely or recklessly
under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of
human life caused serious bodily injury to (insert victims name).
If
you find that the State has failed to prove any element beyond a
reasonable doubt, then you must find the defendant(s) not guilty of the
charge of aggravated assault in that (he/she/they) caused serious bodily
injury to another.
As I previously instructed you, the defendant(s) can be found guilty if (he/she/they) EITHER caused serious bodily injury to another OR attempted to cause serious bodily injury to another.
To
find the defendant(s) guilty of attempting to cause serious bodily
injury to another, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that
the defendant(s) purposely[2] attempted to cause serious bodily injury to another. If
you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant(s) attempted to
cause serious bodily injury, it does not matter whether such injury
actually resulted.
The law provides that a person is guilty of attempt if, acting purposefully, he/she:
(select appropriate section)
1. Engaged
in conduct that would constitute the offense if the attendant
circumstances were as a reasonable person would believe them to be;
(or)
2. Did (or omitted to do) anything with the purpose of causing serious bodily injury to another without further conduct on his/her
part. This means that the defendant(s) did something designed to cause
serious bodily injury without having to take any further action.
(or)
3. Did
(or omitted to do) anything that, under the circumstances as a
reasonable person would believe them to be, was an act (or omission)
constituting as substantial step in a course of conduct planned to
culminate in his/her
commission of the crime. The step taken must be one that is strongly
corroborative of the defendants criminal purpose. The accused must be
shown to have had a firmness of criminal purpose in light of the step(s)
he/she had already taken. These preparatory steps must be substantial and not just very remote preparatory acts.[3]
Serious
bodily injury means bodily injury which creates a substantial risk of
death or which causes serious permanent disfigurement, or protracted
loss or impairment of the function of any bodily member or organ.
A person acts purposely with respect to the result of his/her conduct if it is his/her conscious object to cause such a result. A person acts purposely if he/she acts with design, with a specific intent, with a particular object or purpose, or if he/she means to do what he/she does (e.g., I did it on purpose).
If
you find that the State has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the
defendant(s) attempted to cause serious bodily injury to another, then
you must find the defendant(s) guilty.[4]
If
you find that the State has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt
that the defendant(s) attempted to cause serious bodily injury to
another, then you must find the defendant(s) not guilty.[5]
[1] In State v. Curtis, 195 N.J. Super. 354, 364-65 (App. Div. 1984), certif. den., 99 N.J.
212 (1984), the Court found, in the context of aggravated manslaughter,
that the difference between recklessness under circumstances
manifesting extreme indifference to human life and mere recklessness is
the difference between the probability as opposed to the possibility
that a certain result will occur. The Supreme Court endorsed Curtis in State v. Breakiron, 108 N.J. 591, 605 (1987). The case law has applied the Curtis probability standard to the aggravated-assault statute. State v. Scher, 278 N.J. Super. 249, 272 (App. Div. 1994), certif. den., 140 N.J. 276 (1995); State v. Oriole, 243 N.J. Super. 688, 693 (Law Div. 1990). Please
note that in the aggravated-assault statute the Legislature has used
the term extreme indifference to the value of human life while the
aggravated-manslaughter statute speaks in terms of extreme indifference
to human life. Therefore, the
indifference referred to in the aggravated-assault statute would appear
not to relate to whether the victim lives or dies but rather to the
value of the victims life.
[2] When
a person actually causes serious bodily injury, it does not matter
whether his mental state is purposeful, knowing or reckless (under
circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human
life). When, however, the person attempts to cause, but does not cause, serious bodily injury, he must act purposefully. Cf. State v. McAllister, 211 N.J. Super. 355, 362 (App. Div. 1986).
[3] State v. Fornino, 223 N.J. 531, 538 (App. Div. 1988), certif, den., 111 N.J. 570 (1988); cert. den., 488 U.S. 859, 109 S.Ct. 152, 102 L.Ed. 2d 123 (1988).
[5] In
second degree aggravated assault cases involving the use of a deadly
weapon, it may be appropriate to instruct the jury on the following
lesser offenses: third degree aggravated assault, N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1b(2); fourth degree aggravated assault, N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1b(3); and simple assault, N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1a(1) and (2). State v. Villar, 292 N.J. Super. 320, 326-330 (App. Div. 1996), revd. o.g., 150 N.J. 503, 517 n. 4 (1997). See also, State v. Sloane, 111 N.J.
293, 301 (1988). These offenses may be charged as lesser offenses even
though third degree aggravated assault, fourth degree aggravated assault
and a(2) disorderly persons simple assault contain an element (a deadly
weapon) that is not an element of second degree aggravated assault. State v. Villar, supra; State v. Sloane, supra.
When these lesser offenses are to be charged, the trial court and
counsel should construct a sequence of the lesser offenses to be
charged. State v. Villar, 150 N.J. at 517 n. 4.
https://njlaws.com/assaultseriousinjury1.html?id=5372&a=
