A jury instruction is the judge's oral explanation of the law governing a case. Jury instructions are given after the attorneys have presented all the evidence and have made final arguments, but before the jury begins deliberations. Improper explanations of the law to be applied in jury instructions are often the basis for later appeals.
Minnesota Instruction to Jury that Intent is not an Essential Element of Conversion: In Minnesota, the instruction to the jury regarding conversion clarifies that intent is not an essential element of the offense. Conversion refers to the act of wrongfully taking, using, or controlling someone else's property without their consent. This instruction is particularly important in cases where the defendant may argue that they did not intend to convert the property. It reminds the jury that even if the defendant did not have the specific intent to permanently deprive the owner of their property, they can still be found guilty of conversion if they knowingly exercised control or authority over it without the owner's permission. In Minnesota, the following are the different types of instructions to the jury that intent is not an essential element of conversion: 1. General Instruction: This instruction informs the jury that the defendant can be found guilty of conversion even if they did not have the specific intent to convert the property. It emphasizes that the focus should be on whether the defendant knowingly took control of the property without permission, rather than their intent to permanently deprive the owner. 2. Instruction for Mistaken Belief: This instruction is applicable when the defendant claims to have had a mistaken belief that they had the right to take or use the property. It advises the jury not to consider the defendant's intent, but rather whether they knowingly exercised control over the property without authorization. 3. Instruction for Good Faith Claim of Right: In cases where the defendant argues that they genuinely believed they had the legal right to the property, this instruction is given. It instructs the jury that even if the defendant had a good faith belief in their right to the property, they can still be found guilty of conversion as long as they knowingly exercised control over it without permission. These instructions play a crucial role in ensuring that the jury focuses on the objective actions of the defendant rather than their subjective intent. By emphasizing that intent is not an essential element of conversion in Minnesota, these instructions help guide the jury's decision-making process in cases involving allegations of property misappropriation.
