7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999
Go to Federal Model Instructions Table of Contents - Go to 7th Circuit Table of Contents

        001    Assimilative Crimes Act -- Elements (18 USC 13)
        002    Elements (18 USC 152(1))
        003    Definition Of Concealment (18 USC 152)
        004    Definition Of Fraudulently (18 USC 152)
        005    Concealment Or Transfer Of Assets In Contemplation Of Bankruptcy Or With Intent To Defeat The Provisions Of The Bankruptcy Law (18 USC 152 (7))
        006    Definition Of "In Contemplation Of Bankruptcy Proceeding" (18 USC 152)
        007    Definition Of "Transfer" (18 USC 152)
        008    False Oath, False Declaration Under Penalty Of Perjury--Elements (18 USC 152 (2) & (3))
        009    False Declaration Under Penalty Of Perjury-Definition Of Materiality (18 USC 152)
        010    Presenting Or Using A False Claim-Elements (18 USC 152(4)
        011    Bribery--Elements (18 USC 152(6))
        012    Destruction Of Records; False Entries--Elements (18 USC 152)
        013    Withholding Records--Elements (18 USC 152)
        014    Giving A Bribe--Elements (18 USC 201)
        015    Making An Illegal Payment--Elements (18 USC 201)
        016    Receiving An Illegal Payment--Elements (18 USC 201)
        017    Definition Of A Public Official (18 USC 201)
        018    Definition Of Official Act (18 USC 201)
        019    Definition Of Gift (18 USC 201)
        020    Receiving An Illegal Payment--Definition Of Illegal Payment (18 USC 201)
        021    Intent To Influence (18 USC 201)
        022    Acts Affecting A Personal Financial Interest--Elements (18 USC 208)
        023    Elements (18 USC 241)
        024    Definition Of Injure, Oppress, Threaten, Or Intimidate (18 USC 241)
        025    Definition Of Constitutional Rights (18 USC 241)
        026    Definition Of Liberty (18 USC 241)
        027    Death (18 USC 241)
        028    Deprivation Of Rights Under Color Of Law - Elements (18 USC 242)
        029    Rights (18 USC 242)
        030    Definition Of Color Of Law (18 USC 242)
        031    Definition Of Liberty (18 USC 242)
        032    Death (18 USC 242)

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

[001]  Assimilative Crimes Act–elements

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Assimilative Crimes Act–Elements (18 USC 13)

To sustain the charge of committing a crime upon or within a federal enclave, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, that the crime alleged was committed upon or within a federal jurisdiction;

Second, that the crime alleged, if committed within the jurisdiction of (name jurisdiction) in which the federal enclave is situated, is punishable by the laws of the State of (name state); and

Third, that the defendant: (here set out the elements of the State or Territorial crime).

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any one of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

The purpose of the Assimilative Crimes Act, 18 USC 13, is to supplement the UnitedStates Criminal Code by adopting state criminal statutes relating to acts or omissions committed within areas over which the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction and which are not made punishable by any enactment of Congress. United States v. Chaussee, 536 F.2d 637 (7th Cir.1976).The Act has no application if such acts or omissions are made penal by federal statutes. United States v. Patmore, 475 F.2d 752, 753 (10th Cir.1973). The Act makes applicable in federal prosecutions not only the particular state definition of an offense but also the punishment which state law makes applicable to that offense. United States v. Sosseur, 181 F.2d 873 (7th Cir.1950). Section 13 was amended in 1988 to expand the meaning of "punishment" in subsection (a) to authorize federal judges to impose non-jail sanctions such as license suspensions and alcohol education programs for drunk driving offenses. See 134 Cong. Rec. S17360-02. Section 13 was again amended in 1994 to require the imposition of additional imprisonment and/or fines when a minor is present during the commission of a drunk driving offense and the law of the state does not provide for such enhancements.

When there is no factual dispute as to whether the facility or site is a federal enclave, the court should take judicial notice of that fact in accordance with Instruction 1.07 of the Federal Criminal Jury Instructions of the Seventh Circuit or give a mandatory instruction that the facility or site is a federal enclave. See United States v. Piggie, 622 F.2d 486 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 863 (1980) (trial court could take judicial notice of the fact that the federal penitentiary at Leavenworth, Kansas, was a federal enclave).

On the other hand, if the nature of the location is in issue, the appropriate method for resolving that issue is by a pretrial motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. See United States v. Keller, 451 F.Supp. 631 (D.P.R.1978). In Keller, the trial court considered whether a boat containing marijuana was owned by a United States citizen so as to fall within federal maritime jurisdiction under 18 USC 7(1). The court held that ownership was a mixed question of law and fact to be determined by the court. Id. at 636. In most cases where there is a factual dispute as to the nature of the facility or site as a federal enclave, the question of jurisdiction will be resolved by the court. Because there may be a situation that the Committee cannot envision where the issue as to whether the crime was committed upon a federal enclave requires submission to a jury, the instruction covers that contingency.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Concealment Of Property Belonging To Bankruptcy Estate Of Debtor (18 USC 152(1))

To sustain the charge of concealment of property belonging to the estate of a debtor in a bankruptcy proceeding, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, a bankruptcy proceeding existed under Title 11;

Second, [identify property or assets] belonged to the bankrupt estate;

Third, the defendant concealed [identify property or assets] from [creditors, custodian, trustee, marshal, United States Trustee or other person charged with control of custody of such property]; and,

Fourth, the defendant acted knowingly and fraudulently.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Concealment Of Property Belonging To Bankruptcy Estate Of Debtor (18 USC 152(1))

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy Fraud (Making A False Statement) (18 USC 152(2-4))

This instruction should be given whenever the elements instructions for False Claims, Destruction of Records, False Entries, or Withholding Records are given.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Concealment Of Property Belonging To Bankruptcy Estate Of Debtor (18 USC 152(1))

To sustain the charge of [concealment; transfer] of property belonging to the estate of a debtor [in contemplation of bankruptcy; with intent to defeat the provisions of the bankruptcy law], the government must prove the following propositions:

First, [a proceeding in bankruptcy existed under Title 11; a bankruptcy proceeding was contemplated by [defendant; name of business; name of corporation]];

Second, [in contemplation of such bankruptcy proceeding; with intent to defeat the provisions of the bankruptcy law], the defendant transferred or concealed certain property, namely (identify the property), which belonged or would belong to the bankrupt estate; and,

Third, the defendant [concealed; transferred] such property knowingly and fraudulently.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy (Title 18, Chapter 9, Sections 151-154).

Federal Models By Offense: Assault Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury (18 USC 113(a)(6)).

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

 [007] Definition of "Transfer"

(18 USC 152)

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy (Title 18, Chapter 9, Sections 151-154).

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Assault Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury (18 USC 113(a)(6))

"Transfer" as defined under the bankruptcy law includes every manner, direct or indirect, absolute or conditional, of disposing or parting with property or with an interest in property.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

[008] False Oath, False Declaration
 Under Penalty of Perjury--Elements

(18 USC 152(2) & (3))  

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy (Title 18, Chapter 9, Sections 151-154).

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Assault Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury (18 USC 113(a)(6))

To sustain the charge of making [a false oath; a false account; a false declaration under penalty of perjury] in a bankruptcy proceeding, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, a proceeding in bankruptcy existed under Title 11;

Second, the defendant made [an oath; account; declaration; certification; verification; statement under penalty of perjury] in relation to the bankruptcy proceeding;

Third, the [oath; account; declaration; certification; verification; statement under penalty of perjury] related to some material matter;

Fourth, the [oath; account; declaration; certification; verification; statement under penalty of perjury was false; and,

Fifth, the defendant made such [oath; account; declaration; certification; verification; statement under penalty of perjury] knowingly and fraudulently.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

A statement is material if it had the effect of influencing the court, the trustee, or the creditors, or was capable of or had the potential to do so. [It is not necessary that the statement actually have that influence or be relied on by the court, the trustee, or the creditors, so long as it had the potential or capability to do so.]

[Materiality does not require a showing that creditors were harmed by the false statement.]

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Presenting Or Using A False Claim In A Bankruptcy Proceeding (18 USC 152(4))

To sustain the charge of [presenting; using] a false claim in a bankruptcy proceeding, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, a proceeding in bankruptcy existed under Title 11; and,

Second, the defendant [personally; by agent; by proxy; by attorney as agent, proxy or attorney] [presented; used] a claim for proof against the estate of a debtor;

Third, such claim was false;

Fourth, such claim was [presented; used] knowingly and fraudulently.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy (Title 18, Chapter 9, Sections 151-154).

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Assault Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury (18 USC 113(a)(6))

To sustain the charge of bribery or attempted bribery for acting or failing to act in any bankruptcy proceeding, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, a bankruptcy proceeding existed under Title 11; and,

Second, the defendant [gave; offered; received; attempted to obtain] [money; property; remuneration; compensation; reward; advantage, or promise thereof] for [acting; failing to act] in such bankruptcy proceeding; and

Third, the defendant acted knowingly and fraudulently.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that either of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

To sustain the charge of [concealment of records; destruction of records; making a false entry in a document] relating to the property or the affairs of a debtor [in contemplation of bankruptcy; after filing a case in bankruptcy], the government must prove the following propositions:

First, a bankruptcy proceeding [was contemplated; existed] under Title 11;

Second, the defendant [concealed; destroyed; mutilated; falsified; made a false entry in] document(s);

Third, the document(s) affected or related to the property or affairs of the debtor;

Fourth, the defendant acted knowingly and fraudulently.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

To sustain the charge of withholding records after filing a case in bankruptcy, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, a bankruptcy proceeding existed under Title 11;

Second, the defendant withheld from [the custodian; the trustee; the marshal; an officer of the court; a United States Trustee] entitled to its possession any [recorded information; books; documents; records; papers];

Third, such [recorded information; books; documents; records; papers] related to the property or financial affairs of the debtor;

Fourth, the defendant acted knowingly and fraudulently.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

To sustain the charge of giving a bribe, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, that the defendant directly or indirectly [promised, gave, offered] something of value to a public official;

Second, that the defendant acted with intent to influence an official act; and

Third, that the defendant acted corruptly, that is, with the purpose, at least in part, of accomplishing either an unlawful end result, or a lawful end result by some unlawful method or means.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that both of these propositions have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that either of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

The third element is derived from United States v. Bonito, 57 F.3d 167, 171 (2d Cir. 1995). It should be noted that Bonito was a case involving 18 USC 666, not 18 USC 201. The term "corruptly" has been defined somewhat differently in the context of other criminal statutes. See, e.g. Roma Construction Co. v.Russo, 96 F.3d 566, 573-74 (1st Cir. 1996).

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy (Title 18, Chapter 9, Sections 151-154).

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Assault Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury (18 USC 113(a)(6))

To sustain the charge of making an illegal payment, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, that the defendant directly or indirectly [promised, gave, offered] a thing of value personally to a public official;

Second, that the giving of the promise or gift was not provided for by law;

Third, that the thing of value was promised or given for or because of an official act

performed or to be performed by the public official; and

Fourth, that the defendant acted knowingly.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any one of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

[NOTE: Choose appropriate term contained in brackets.]

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy (Title 18, Chapter 9, Sections 151-154).

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Assault Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury (18 USC 113(a)(6))

To sustain the charge of receiving an illegal payment, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, that the defendant was a public official;

Second, that the defendant personally [asked, demanded, exacted, solicited, sought, accepted, received, agreed to receive] something of value not provided for by law; and

Third, that the defendant knew that what he [asked, demanded, exacted, solicited, sought, accepted, received, agreed to receive] was [asked, demanded, exacted, solicited, sought, accepted, received, agreed to receive] because of an official act performed or to be performed by him.

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any one of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

[NOTE: Choose appropriate term contained in brackets.]

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy (Title 18, Chapter 9, Sections 151-154).

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Assault Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury (18 USC 113(a)(6))

A public official includes an officer, employee, or person acting on behalf of the United States, or any department, agency, or branch of the United States Government in any official function under or by authority of any such department, agency, or branch.

This instruction should be given along with the elements instructions of § 201 Giving a Bribe, Receiving a Bribe, Making an Illegal Payment, and Receiving an Illegal Payment.

Several cases deal with state or local officials administering federally funded programs and focus on whether the operative state or local employee is a "public official" within the meaning of * 201. Federal funding for a project, even 100% funding, is not enough. United States v. Del Toro, 513 F.2d 656 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 826 (1975). Rather, the jury should be told that a state or local person is a public official within the meaning of § 201 if there is administrative involvement by the federal government and if the state or local employee is acting under the direct supervision of a federal official in the agency responsible for the program. United States v. Gallegos, 510 F.Supp. 1112 (D.N.M.1981). See also United States v. Kirby, 587 F.2d 876 (7th Cir.1978).

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy (Title 18, Chapter 9, Sections 151-154).

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Assault Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury (18 USC 113(a)(6))

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy (Title 18, Chapter 9, Sections 151-154).

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Assault Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury (18 USC 113(a)(6))

The government must prove that the giving of a promise or gift was not provided for by law. It is unlawful for an officer or employee of the United States government to receive anything of value for his official services from any source other than the government of the United States, except as may be contributed out of the treasury of any state, county, or municipality.

See 18 USC 209(a).

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy (Title 18, Chapter 9, Sections 151-154).

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Assault Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury (18 USC 113(a)(6))

It is unlawful for an officer or employee of the United States government to receive anything of value for his official services from any source other than the government of the United States, except as may be contributed out of the treasury of any state, county, or municipality.

Committee Comment

See 18 USC 209(a).

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy (Title 18, Chapter 9, Sections 151-154).

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Assault Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury (18 USC 113(a)(6))

It is not necessary that the [public official; defendant] had the power to or did perform the act for which he/she [was promised; was given; received; agreed to receive] something of value; it is sufficient if the matter was one that was before him/her in his official capacity.

[Nor is it necessary that the defendant in fact intended to be influenced. It is sufficient if the defendant knew that the thing of value was offered with the intent to influence official action.]

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

Federal Models By Offense: Bankruptcy (Title 18, Chapter 9, Sections 151-154).

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Assault Resulting In Serious Bodily Injury (18 USC 113(a)(6))

To sustain the charge of (here insert crime), the government must prove the following propositions:

First, that the defendant was an officer or employee of (here name department or agency). A _______ is an officer or employee of the _______; and

Second, that the defendant, in (his/her) capacity as an employee or officer of the government, participated personally and substantially in a matter in which (he/she) knew that [he/she personally, some member of his/her family, some organization in which he/she had an interest] had a substantial financial interest [or with which he/she was negotiating or had arranged for employment].

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that both of these propositions have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that either of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

The number of variables in this statute make it impossible to draft one standard instruction to cover all situations that can arise. The purpose of the law is to prevent persons who work with the government from profiting from this relationship by private arrangements with organizations with which the government does business. It does not, however, make criminal every contact or connection between an agent of the United States government and a private organization, but only contacts which are significant. Similarly, the statute does not prevent an agent of the United States government from having any investment whatsoever in an organization with which the government does business, but only an investment which is substantial. On the other hand, the statute is violated regardless of whether the United States loses any money as a result of a defendant's conflict of interest. It is the conflict itself which violates the law and not the injury to the United States.

Unlike § 209, this statute does apply to "special government employees." A "special government employee" is one who performs temporary--even if full- time--duties, with or without government compensation, for a period not to exceed 130 days during any 365 consecutive days.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Conspiracy To Deprive Person Of Civil Rights (18 USC 241)

To sustain the charge of conspiracy against civil rights, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, that the defendant entered into a conspiracy to [injure,] [oppress,] [threaten,] [or] [intimidate] one or more victims;

Second, that the conspiracy was directed at the victim's[s'] free exercise or enjoyment of his [their] right to _________, which is secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States;

Third, that the defendant intended to deprive the victim of the right described above; [and]

Fourth, that one or more of the intended victims was present in any State, Territory, or District of the United States.

[Fifth, that (name) died as a result of the conspiracy of the defendants.]

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any one of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

See the Comment to the instruction for 18 USC 242. This instruction should be given in conjunction with instructions concerning conspiracy, but without language requiring proof of an overt act.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

(18 USC 241)

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Conspiracy To Deprive Person Of Civil Rights (18 USC 241)

The word[s] ["injure,"] ["oppress,"] ["threaten,"] [or] ["intimidate"] cover[s] a variety of conduct intended to harm, frighten, or inhibit the free action of other persons. Furthermore, to threaten or intimidate does not require the possibility of physical force or of physical harm.

See United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745 (1966); Posey v. United States, 416 F.2d 545 (5^th Cir.1969), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 946 (1970).

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Conspiracy To Deprive Person Of Civil Rights (18 USC 241)

The indictment charges that the defendant and others conspired to deprive (victim) of the following right[s]: (describe right[s]).

This right is [These rights are], in fact, [a] constitutional right[s] recognized by law.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Conspiracy To Deprive Person Of Civil Rights (18 USC 241)

The word "liberty" includes the liberty to be free from unlawful attacks upon the victim's person. "Liberty" includes the principle that no person may ever be physically assaulted, intimidated, or otherwise abused intentionally and without justification by a person acting under the color of the laws of any state.

[Although (name) had been arrested and had been deprived of his/her liberty to come and go without restraint, he retained his/her constitutional liberty to be free from physical assaults or beatings that were beyond the lawful authority of the officer.]

See United States v. Price, 383 U.S. 787 (1966); Screws v. United States, 325 U.S. 91

(1945); Logan v. United States, 144 U.S. 263 (1892); United States v. Stokes, 506 F.2d 771 (5th

Cir.1975).

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Conspiracy To Deprive Person Of Civil Rights (18 USC 241)

The government must prove that (name) died as a result of the conspiracy of the defendants.

It is not necessary for the prosecution to prove that the defendants intended (name) to die as a result of their conspiracy. This element would be satisfied if you find that the conduct of one or more of the defendants contributed to or hastened the death of (name), even if that conduct alone would not have caused his/her death.

To be used when the indictment charges that the victim died as a result of the conspiracy. This instruction should be given with an appropriate "right" instruction.

See United States v. Hayes, 589 F.2d 811 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 847 (1979); United States v. Guillette, 547 F.2d 743, 749 (2d Cir.1976), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 839 (1977);

United States v. Hamilton, 182 F.Supp. 548, 550-51 (D.D.C.1960).

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Deprivation Of Civil Rights (18 USC 242)

To sustain the charge of deprivation of rights under color of law, the government must prove the following propositions:

First, that the defendant was acting under color of law;

Second, that the defendant deprived (name of person) of (his/her) right to (name of right), which is secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States;

Third, that the defendant intended to deprive the victim of the right described above;

Fourth, that (name of person) was present in (name of State, Territory, or District of the United States).

[Fifth, that (name) died as a result of the defendant's conduct.]

If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each of these propositions has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant guilty.

If, on the other hand, you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any one of these propositions has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should find the defendant not guilty.

The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Pub. L. 103-322, Title XXXII, § 320201(b), 108 State 1796, 2113 (1994), amended Section 242 to extend civil rights protections to all persons present in States, Territories, and Districts of the United States. As amended, Section 242 no longer requires persons who have been deprived of their rights to be "inhabitants of" a State, Territory, or District of the United States; rather, such persons need only be "persons in" those places. Little legislative history exists concerning the reasons for this change. As introduced by Senator Joseph Biden, the change was meant to "[e]xtend the protections of the criminal civil rights statute to any person in a state." 139 Cong. Rec. S12388-04, S12445.

The same change had also been proposed in Title X, Section 1006 of the Comprehensive Violent Crime Control Act of 1991, introduced by Senators Strom Thurmond and Robert Dole. Senator Thurmond had explained that proposed change as follows:

In United States v. Maravilla, 907 F.2d 216 (1st Cir. 1990), the court overturned the convictions of two customs agents for killing an alien who was briefly present in the United States. The rationale was that such a person did not qualify as an "inhabitant" for purposes of 18 USC 242. This section amends 18 USC 241 and 242 to ensure protection of all persons within the United States by these important provisions of the federal civil rights laws, regardless of whether they are "inhabitants."

137 Cong. Rec. S3191-02, S3245. While there were hearings on the 1991 bill, it was never enacted.

For additional general information, see United States v. Price, 383 U.S. 787, 794 (1966); Williams v. United States, 341 U.S. 97 (1951); Screws v. United States, 325 U.S. 91 (1945); United States v. Classic, 313 U.S. 299, 327-29 (1941).

Footnote 1 formerly read: "To be used when the indictment charges that the victim died as a result of the conspiracy." Nothing in the old or new statute ties the victim's death to a conspiracy. As it now stands, the conspiracy language in the footnote is unnecessary and was probably a mistake in the original version.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Deprivation Of Civil Rights (18 USC 242)

The right[s] to ________ [is; are] secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. The defendant need not have known that [this; these] right[s] [was; were] secured by the Constitution or the laws of the United States.

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Deprivation Of Civil Rights (18 USC 242)

Acts are performed under color of law when the defendant acts in his/her official capacity or purports or claims to act in his/her official capacity. The act of the defendant must consist of the abuse or misuse of the power possessed by the defendant by virtue of his/her office.

[A defendant who is not an officer acts under color of law when he/she participates with a person acting under color of law whom he/she knows to be an officer, in the commission of the unlawful acts charged in the indictment.]

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Deprivation Of Civil Rights (18 USC 242)

The word "liberty" includes the liberty to be free from unlawful attacks upon the victim's person. "Liberty" includes the principle that no person may ever be physically assaulted, intimidated, or otherwise abused intentionally and without justification by a person acting under the color of the laws of any state.

[Although (name) had been arrested and had been deprived of his liberty to come and go without restraint, (he/she) retained (his/her) constitutional liberty to be free from physical assaults or beatings that were beyond the lawful authority of the officer.]

7^th CIRCUIT FEDERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1999

FORECITE National™ Materials Related To This Instruction:

See FORECITE National™ Federal Models By Offense: Deprivation Of Civil Rights (18 USC 242)

See United States v. Hayes, 589 F.2d 811 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 847 (1979).