New Hampshire Jury Instruction - 2.2.3.1 Convicted Prisoner Alleging Excessive Force

• Category: Federal - Jury Instructions - Constitutional Civil Right
• State: Multi-State
• Control #: US-11CF-2-2-3-1
• Format: Word; Rich Text

Description

This form contains sample jury instructions, to be used across the United States. These questions are to be used only as a model, and should be altered to more perfectly fit your own cause of action needs. New Hampshire Jury Instruction — 2.2.3.1 Convicted Prisoner Alleging Excessive Force is a specific guideline provided to juries during criminal trials where a convicted prisoner alleges that excessive force was used against them. This instruction aims to guide the jury by providing a framework to evaluate the claims made by the prisoner and determine whether excessive force was indeed used. Keywords: New Hampshire, jury instruction, 2.2.3.1, convicted prisoner, excessive force There is only one type of New Hampshire Jury Instruction — 2.2.3.1 Convicted Prisoner Alleging Excessive Force, but it covers the following significant aspects: 1. Definition of Excessive Force: The instruction defines excessive force as the use of force beyond what is reasonably necessary to maintain order, follow regulations, or protect others in a correctional facility. It emphasizes that the use of force must be evaluated based on the circumstances known to the defendant at the time the force was used. 2. Objective Reasonableness: The instruction highlights the importance of evaluating the reasonableness of the force under the circumstances. It directs the jury to consider whether the correctional officer's actions were objectively reasonable based on the information they had at the time, rather than judging with hindsight. 3. Lack of Malice: The instruction instructs the jury to consider whether the force used by the correctional officer was motivated by malice or ill intent. It helps the jury distinguish between excessive force resulting from malicious intent and force used with a legitimate purpose, even if it may have caused injury. 4. Use of Alternative Means: The jury instruction explains that the jury should consider whether the correctional officer used any alternative means to control the situation before resorting to force. By evaluating whether the officer had other reasonable options available, the jury can determine if the force used was excessive. 5. Level of Injury: The instruction advises the jury to consider the extent and severity of the injury suffered by the prisoner. While recognizing that not every injury equates to the use of excessive force, it highlights that severe or unnecessary injuries may indicate excessive force. 6. Expert Testimony: The instruction informs the jury that it may consider expert testimony from medical professionals or other relevant experts to understand the nature of the injuries and determine if excessive force was used. By providing these guidelines, the New Hampshire Jury Instruction — 2.2.3.1 Convicted Prisoner Alleging Excessive Force aims to ensure that juries can fairly evaluate the claims made by prisoners who allege excessive force and reach a reasoned decision based on the evidence presented.

New Hampshire Jury Instruction — 2.2.3.1 Convicted Prisoner Alleging Excessive Force is a specific guideline provided to juries during criminal trials where a convicted prisoner alleges that excessive force was used against them. This instruction aims to guide the jury by providing a framework to evaluate the claims made by the prisoner and determine whether excessive force was indeed used. Keywords: New Hampshire, jury instruction, 2.2.3.1, convicted prisoner, excessive force There is only one type of New Hampshire Jury Instruction — 2.2.3.1 Convicted Prisoner Alleging Excessive Force, but it covers the following significant aspects: 1. Definition of Excessive Force: The instruction defines excessive force as the use of force beyond what is reasonably necessary to maintain order, follow regulations, or protect others in a correctional facility. It emphasizes that the use of force must be evaluated based on the circumstances known to the defendant at the time the force was used. 2. Objective Reasonableness: The instruction highlights the importance of evaluating the reasonableness of the force under the circumstances. It directs the jury to consider whether the correctional officer's actions were objectively reasonable based on the information they had at the time, rather than judging with hindsight. 3. Lack of Malice: The instruction instructs the jury to consider whether the force used by the correctional officer was motivated by malice or ill intent. It helps the jury distinguish between excessive force resulting from malicious intent and force used with a legitimate purpose, even if it may have caused injury. 4. Use of Alternative Means: The jury instruction explains that the jury should consider whether the correctional officer used any alternative means to control the situation before resorting to force. By evaluating whether the officer had other reasonable options available, the jury can determine if the force used was excessive. 5. Level of Injury: The instruction advises the jury to consider the extent and severity of the injury suffered by the prisoner. While recognizing that not every injury equates to the use of excessive force, it highlights that severe or unnecessary injuries may indicate excessive force. 6. Expert Testimony: The instruction informs the jury that it may consider expert testimony from medical professionals or other relevant experts to understand the nature of the injuries and determine if excessive force was used. By providing these guidelines, the New Hampshire Jury Instruction — 2.2.3.1 Convicted Prisoner Alleging Excessive Force aims to ensure that juries can fairly evaluate the claims made by prisoners who allege excessive force and reach a reasoned decision based on the evidence presented.