In Re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases-Instructions 25.9-25.13 — Pariente, J., Concurring

Summary

Justice Pariente concurred in retaining the reasonable-doubt language in the amended drug-trafficking instructions because the lack-of-knowledge defense is affirmative, the instructions had been in effect since 2007, and the Legislature had not clarified the allocation of burdens after adopting the governing statute. She reasoned that the instructions are consistent with placing the burden of production on the defendant while requiring the State to prove knowledge beyond a reasonable doubt once the defense is raised. Justice Canady, concurring in part and dissenting in part, would have deferred approval of the reasonable-doubt directive because the burden of proof for the affirmative defense remained unsettled.