Home Table of Contents

WPI 365.20 Sexually Violent Predators—Concluding Instruction

6A WAPRAC WPI 365.20Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil

6A Wash. Prac., Wash. Pattern Jury Instr. Civ. WPI 365.20 (7th ed.)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Civil
April 2022 Update
Washington State Supreme Court Committee on Jury Instructions
Part XIX. Involuntary Treatment
Chapter 365. Involuntary Treatment—Sexually Violent Predators
WPI 365.20 Sexually Violent Predators—Concluding Instruction
When you begin to deliberate, your first duty is to select a presiding juror. The presiding juror's responsibility is to see that you discuss the issues in this case in an orderly and reasonable manner, that you discuss each issue submitted for your decision fully and fairly, and that each one of you has a chance to be heard on every question before you. Deliberations are to occur only in the jury room when all twelve jurors are present.
You are all officers of the court and must evaluate the evidence with an open mind free of bias or prejudice. If during your deliberations, you become concerned that the discussions are being influenced by preconceived bias or prejudice, you must bring this to the attention of the other jurors so that the issue may be fairly discussed among all members of the jury.
You will be given [the exhibits admitted in evidence,] these instructions[,] and a verdict form, which consists of one question for you to answer. In order to answer the question “yes,” the jury must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that “yes” is the correct answer. [Exhibits may have been marked by the court clerk and given a number, but they do not go with you to the jury room during your deliberations unless they have been admitted into evidence. The exhibits that have been admitted will be available to you in the jury room.]
During your deliberations, you may discuss any notes that you have taken during the trial, if you wish. You have been allowed to take notes to assist you in remembering clearly, not to substitute for your memory or the memories or notes of other jurors. Do not assume, however, that your notes are more or less accurate than your memory.
You will need to rely on your notes and memory as to the testimony presented in this case. Testimony will rarely, if ever, be repeated for you during your deliberations.
If, after carefully reviewing the evidence and instructions, you feel a need to ask the court a legal or procedural question that you have been unable to answer, write the question simply and clearly. [For this purpose, use the form provided in the jury room.] In your question, do not state how the jury has voted, or in any other way indicate how your deliberations are proceeding. The presiding juror should sign and date the question and give it to the [bailiff] [(insert other appropriate staff person)]. I will confer with the lawyers to determine what response, if any, can be given.
In order to reach a verdict, all jurors must agree. When you have reached a verdict, the presiding juror will fill in and sign the verdict form. The presiding juror will then inform the [bailiff] [(insert other appropriate staff person)] that you have reached a verdict. The [bailiff] [(insert other appropriate staff person)] will conduct you back into this courtroom where the verdict will be announced.
Use in every case. Use bracketed language as appropriate.
This instruction is modeled after the general concluding instruction for civil cases, as modified to fit SVP commitment cases. See WPI 1.08 (Concluding Instruction—For General Verdict Form).
The second paragraph of the instruction, which encourages all members of the jury to be responsible for ensuring that decisions are made based solely on the evidence and not upon preconceived biases or prejudices. The United State Supreme Court in Peña-Rodriguez v. Colorado, U.S. , 137 S. Ct 855, 869, 197 L.Ed.2d 107 (2017), concluded that the general rule against impeaching a jury verdict must fall when a juror has indicated that he or she relied on racial animus or stereotypes in reaching the verdict. In Turner v. Stime, 153 Wn.App. 581, 222 P.3d 1243 (2009), the court concluded that statements of clear racial bias made by a juror concerning plaintiff's counsel do not “inhere in the verdict” and that it was proper for the trial court to grant a new trial upon proof that such statements were made.
For a discussion of other issues involving both conscious and unconscious bias, see the Comment to WPI 1.01 (Advance Oral Instruction—Beginning of Proceedings).
[Current as of October 2020.]
End of Document