SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1CR07-701 09/22/03

LACK OF INTENT DEFENSE TO CHARGE OF DUI – 23 V.S.A. § 1201(f)

The defense of lack of intent is presented in this case.  If you find that the State has proven all of the essential elements of DUI, beyond a reasonable doubt, then you will need to consider this defense.  If the State has not proven all of the essential elements of DUI, then you must return a verdict of “not guilty.”

(Def)_______________ bears the burden of proving this defense by a preponderance of the evidence.  This means that the evidence must show that the elements of the defense are more likely true than not true.  This burden of proof is less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

In order to prove the defense of lack of intent, (Def)_______________ must have proven the following elements:

(1) (Def)_______________ had no intention of placing the vehicle in motion; and

(2) (Def)_______________ did not place the vehicle in motion while [he] [she] was under the influence of intoxicating liquor.

Intent is a decision to act knowingly, with a conscious objective of accomplishing a certain result.  In determining (Def)_______________’s intent, you should consider all the facts and circumstances proven by the evidence.

If the State has proven the essential elements of DUI beyond a reasonable doubt, and if (Def)_______________ has failed to prove the elements of the lack-of-intent defense by a preponderance of the evidence, then you must find (Def)_______________ guilty.  However, if the State has not proven the essential elements of DUI, or if (Def)_______________ has proven the elements of the lack-of-intent defense, then you must find (Def)_______________ not guilty.