The Ambiguous Jury Instruction
During a criminal trial, the judge reads the jury instructions aloud. One instruction states: 'The defendant is charged with assault with a deadly weapon. To find the defendant guilty, you must find that the defendant (1) committed an act that by its nature would probably and directly result in the application of physical force against another person, and (2) when the defendant acted, he was aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to realize that his act by its nature would probably and directly result in the application of physical force against another person.' The judge then says: 'You may also consider the lesser included offense of simple assault, which requires only an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present ability, to commit a violent injury on another person.' The word 'attempt' is used in both instructions. The jury asks for clarification on the difference between 'attempt' in the greater offense and 'attempt' in the lesser offense. The judge responds: 'The word 'attempt' has the same meaning in both instructions.' You must transcribe the exchange accurately. Later, the attorneys argue that the judge's clarification was erroneous.
1. As the court reporter, how do you ensure the transcript accurately reflects the judge's statement and the context?
Read the worked answer
The court reporter must transcribe verbatim what was said, including the judge's exact words: 'The word 'attempt' has the same meaning in both instructions.' Additionally, the reporter should include contextual details such as the fact that the jury asked for clarification, the specific question, and the judge's response. This may involve noting the speaker and any non-verbal cues if relevant (e.g., 'The Court:'). The transcript should also include the original jury instructions as read, so that the context is clear. The reporter must not interpret or paraphrase. If there is any ambiguity in the audio, the reporter should use a reliable recording to verify. The goal is to provide an accurate record for appeal.
2. What legal terminology issue arises from the judge's statement, and how might it affect the transcript's role in an appeal?
Read the worked answer
The legal issue is that 'attempt' in the greater offense (assault with a deadly weapon) likely refers to the actus reus of attempting a battery, while in the lesser offense (simple assault), 'attempt' is the mental state and act of trying to commit a violent injury. The judge's statement that they have the same meaning could be legally erroneous. The transcript's role is to preserve the exact words for appellate review. If the judge's clarification was erroneous, the transcript will be crucial for the appellate court to assess whether the error was preserved and whether it affected the verdict. The reporter must ensure the transcript is verbatim and includes the full context, as any omission or paraphrase could undermine the appeal. The reporter should not inject legal interpretation but should accurately capture the exchange.