2.2-1 Presumption of Innocence
Revised to December 1, 2007
In this case, as in all criminal prosecutions, the defendant is presumed to be innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This presumption of innocence was with this defendant when (he/she) was first presented for trial in this case. It continues with (him/her) throughout this trial, unless and until such time as all evidence produced here in the orderly conduct of the case, considered in the light of these instructions of law, and deliberated upon by you in the jury room, satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt that (he/she) is guilty. The presumption of innocence applies individually to each crime charged and it may be overcome as to each specific crime only after the state introduces evidence that establishes the defendant's guilt as to each crime charged beyond a reasonable doubt.1
when the presumption of innocence has been overcome by evidence proving beyond a
reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the crime charged, then it is the
sworn duty of the jury to enforce the law and to render a guilty verdict.2
1 See State v. Gerald W., 103 Conn. App. 784, 790, cert. denied, 284 Conn. 933 (2007).
2 See State v. DelValle, 250 Conn. 466, 473 n.10 (1999) (encouraging use of this language to deter jury nullification).
"The presumption of innocence is
not evidence . . . but instead is a way of describing the prosecution's duty to
produce evidence of guilt and to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt."
State v. Gerald W., 103 Conn. App. 784, 789 (2007). The presumption of
innocence and the reasonable doubt standard are "inextricably intertwined."
Id., 789-90 n.4; see also State v. Jackson, 283 Conn. 111, 116 (2007).