In Count of the Indictment, the defendant(s) is (are) charged with the crime of aggravated assault in that he/she/they allegedly on (Date) in the (Municipality)
(READ PERTINENT LANGUAGE OF INDICTMENT)
The defendant(s) is (are) accused of violating a section of our state statutes that reads as follows:
A person is guilty of aggravated assault if he … [a]ttempts to cause significant bodily injury or causes significant bodily injury purposely or knowingly or, under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, recklessly causes significant bodily injury to a person who, with respect to the actor, meets the definition of a victim of domestic violence ….
OPTION ONE
(Causing Significant Bodily Injury)
To find the defendant(s) guilty of aggravated assault for causing significant bodily injury to a person who, with respect to the actor, meets the definition of a victim of domestic violence, the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt each of the following elements:
1. That the defendant(s) caused significant bodily injury to [name of person];
2. That the defendant(s) acted purposely or knowingly or under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, recklessly; and
3. That [name of person] meets the definition of a victim of domestic violence.
(If Causal Relationship Between Conduct and Result is Not an Issue, Charge the Following)
Whether the aggravated assault is committed purposely, knowingly, or recklessly under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life, causing significant bodily injury must be within the design or contemplation of the defendant.
(If Causal Relationship Between Conduct and Result is an Issue, Charge the Following)
Causation3 has a special meaning under the law. To establish causation, the State must prove two elements, each beyond a reasonable doubt: First, but for the defendant’s (defendants’) conduct, the result in question would not have happened. In other words, without defendant’s (defendants’) actions the result would not have occurred.
(When purposeful or knowing conduct involved)
Second, the actual result must have been within the design or contemplation of the defendant(s). If not, it must involve the same kind of injury or harm as that designed or contemplated, and must also not be too remote, too accidental in its occurrence or too dependent on another’s volitional act to have a just bearing on the defendant’s (defendants’) liability or on the gravity of his/her/their offense.
(When reckless conduct involved)
Second, [for reckless conduct] that the actual result must have been within the risk of which the defendant(s) was (were) aware. If not, it must involve the same kind of injury or harm as the probable result and must also not be too remote, too accidental in its occurrence or too dependent on another’s volitional act to have a just bearing on the defendant’s (defendants’) liability or on the gravity of his/her/their offense.
