IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

EASTERN DIVISION



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

No. CR 04-1003

vs.

FINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS

LLOYD LOUIS ENGLER and

BONNIE SUE BAILEY,

Defendants.

____________________



         Ladies and Gentlemen of the Jury:

         The instructions I gave you at the beginning of the trial and during the trial remain in effect. I will now give you some additional instructions.

          You must, of course, continue to follow the instructions I gave you earlier, as well as those I give you now. You must not single out some instructions and ignore others, because all are important. This is true even though some of those I gave you at the beginning of and during trial are not repeated here.

         The instructions I am about to give you now are in writing and will be available to you in the jury room. I emphasize, however, that this does not mean they are more important than my earlier instructions. Again, all instructions, whenever given and whether in writing or not, must be followed.

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         In considering these instructions, attach no importance or significance whatsoever to the order in which they are given.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         Neither in these instructions nor in any ruling, action, or remark that I have made during this trial have I intended to give any opinion or suggestion as to what the facts are or what your verdict should be.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         It is your duty to find from the evidence what the facts are. You will then apply the law, as I give it to you, to those facts. You must follow my instructions on the law, even if you thought the law was different or should be different.

         Do not allow sympathy or prejudice to influence you. The law demands of you a just verdict, unaffected by anything except the evidence, your common sense, and the law as I give it to you.

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         I have mentioned the word “evidence.” The “evidence” in this case consists of the following: the testimony of the witnesses, the documents and other things received as exhibits and any facts that have been stipulated, that is, formally agreed to by the parties.

         You may use reason and common sense to draw deductions or conclusions from facts which have been established by the evidence in the case.

         Certain things are not evidence. I shall list those things again for you now:

         1. Statements, arguments, questions, and comments by the lawyers are not evidence.

         2. Objections are not evidence. The parties have a right to object when they believe something is improper. You should not be influenced by the objection. If I sustained an objection to a question, you must ignore the question and must not try to guess what the answer might have been.

         3. Testimony that I struck from the record, or told you to disregard, is not evidence and must not be considered.

         4. Anything you saw or heard about this case outside the courtroom is not evidence.

         Finally, you were instructed that some evidence was received for a limited purpose only, and you must follow that instruction.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         There are two types of evidence from which a jury may properly find the truth as to the facts of a case: direct evidence and circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence is the evidence of the witness to a fact or facts of which they have knowledge by means of their senses. The other is circumstantial evidence – the proof of a chain of circumstances pointing to the existence or nonexistence of certain facts. The law makes no distinction between direct and circumstantial evidence. You should give all evidence the weight and value you believe it is entitled to receive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER ______

 

         The Government and the defendants have stipulated—that is, they have agreed—that certain facts are as counsel have stated. You must therefore treat those facts as having been proved.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         The jurors are the sole judges of the weight and credibility of the testimony and the value to be given to each witness who has testified in this case. In deciding what the facts are, you may have to decide what testimony you believe and what testimony you do not believe. You may believe all of what a witness said, or only part of it, or none of it.

         In deciding what testimony to believe, consider the witness’s intelligence, the opportunity the witness had to have seen or heard the things testified about, the witness’s memory, any motives that witness may have for testifying a certain way, the manner of the witness while testifying, whether that witness said something different at an earlier time, the general reasonableness of the testimony, and the extent to which the testimony is consistent with any evidence that you believe.

         In deciding whether or not to believe a witness, keep in mind that people sometimes hear or see things differently and sometimes forget things. You need to consider, therefore, whether a contradiction is an innocent misrecollection or lapse of memory or an intentional falsehood, and that may depend on whether it has to do with an important fact or only a small detail.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         In the previous instruction, I instructed you generally on the credibility of witnesses. I now give you this further instruction on how the credibility of a witness can be “impeached” and how you are to consider the testimony of certain witnesses.

         A witness may be discredited or impeached by contradictory evidence; by a showing that the witness testified falsely concerning a material matter; by showing the witness has a motive to be untruthful; or by evidence that at some other time the witness has said or done something, or has failed to say or do something, that is inconsistent with the witness’s present testimony.You have heard evidence that Luke Koehn and Leland Davis have entered into agreements with the U.S. Attorney’s Office that no federal drug charges would be filed against them based on the conduct about which each testified. You may give their testimony such weight as you think it deserves. Whether or not their testimony may have been influenced by hope of avoiding federal drug charges is for you to decide.

 

 

(CONTINUED)


INSTRUCTION NUMBER (Cont’d.)

 

         You have heard evidence that Addie Bunting hopes to receive a reduced sentence on criminal charges in return for her cooperation with the Government in this case. The witness has entered into a “plea agreement” with the U.S. Attorney’s Office that provides that if the witness gives substantial assistance to the Government in its investigation of federal crimes, the prosecutor could file a motion for a reduction of her sentence. The judge has no power to reduce a sentence for substantial assistance unless the Government, acting through the United States Attorney, files such a motion. If such a motion for reduction of sentence for substantial assistance is filed by the Government, then it is up to the judge to decide whether to reduce the sentence at all, and if so, how much to reduce it. You may give her testimony such weight as you think it deserves. Whether or not her testimony may have been influenced by her hope of receiving a reduced sentence is for you to decide.

 

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         You have heard testimony that BONNIE SUE BAILEY made statements to law enforcement officers. It is for you to decide:

         First, whether BONNIE SUE BAILEY made the statements; and

         Second, if so, how much weight you should give to them.

         In making these decisions you should consider all the evidence, including the circumstances under which the statements may have been made.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         In this case, the defendants did not testify. No inference of guilt can be drawn from this. The defendants are not required to testify. The burden of proof remains upon the Government to prove the guilt of the defendants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER _____

 

         You have heard a certain category of evidence called “similar acts” evidence. Here, you have heard evidence that one or both of the defendants were involved in methamphetamine manufacturing, distribution, and use at times other than those charged in the Indictment. You may not use this “similar acts” evidence to decide whether one or both defendants carried out the acts involved in the crimes charged in the Indictment. In order to consider “similar acts” evidence at all, you must first unanimously find beyond a reasonable doubt, based on the rest of the evidence introduced, that the defendant or defendants carried out the acts involved in the crimes charged in the Indictment. If you make that finding, then you may consider the “similar acts” evidence to decide the defendant’s intent and knowledge. “Similar acts” evidence must be proven by a preponderance of the evidence; that is, you must find that the evidence is more likely true than not true. This is a lower standard than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. If you find that this evidence is proven by a preponderance of the evidence, you should give it the weight and value you believe it is entitled to receive. If you find that it is not proven by a preponderance of the evidence, then you shall disregard such evidence.

         Remember, even if you find that one or both of the defendants may have committed a similar act or acts in the past, this is not evidence that he or she committed such acts in this case. You may not convict a person simply because you believe he or she may have committed similar acts in the past. The defendants are on trial only for the crimes charged, and you may consider the evidence of “similar acts” only on the issue of the defendant’s intent and knowledge.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         Exhibits have been admitted into evidence and are to be considered along with all the other evidence to assist you in reaching a verdict. You are not to tamper with the exhibits or their contents, and each exhibit should be returned into open court, along with your verdict, in the same condition as it was received by you.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         You have heard testimony from a person described as an expert. Persons who, by knowledge, skill, training, education or experience, have become expert in some field may state their opinions on matters in that field and may also state the reasons for their opinion.

         Expert testimony should be considered just like any other testimony. You may accept or reject it, and give it as much weight as you think it deserves, considering the witness’s education and experience, the soundness of the reasons given for the opinion, the acceptability of the methods used, and all the other evidence in the case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         A reasonable doubt is a doubt based upon reason and common sense, and not the mere possibility of innocence. A reasonable doubt is the kind of doubt that would make a reasonable person hesitate to act. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, therefore, must be proof of such a convincing character that a reasonable person would not hesitate to rely and act upon it. However, proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         The Indictment in this case charges the defendants with eight separate counts.

         Under Counts 1 and 3, the Indictment charges that on or about the date alleged in the Indictment [Count 1–July 16, 2003; Count 3–October 13, 2003], BONNIE SUE BAILEY and LLOYD LOUIS ENGLER committed the crime of attempting to manufacture, and aiding and abetting the attempt to manufacture, a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine, a Schedule II Controlled Substance.

         Under Counts 2, 5, and 7, the Indictment charges that on or about the date alleged in the Indictment [Count 2–July 16, 2003; Count 5–October 13, 2003; Count 7–December 16, 2003], BONNIE SUE BAILEY committed the crime of possessing pseudoephedrine, a List I Chemical, knowing, intending, and having reasonable cause to believe that the pseudoephedrine would be used to manufacture methamphetamine, a Schedule II Controlled Substance.

         Under Count 4, the Indictment charges that on or about October 13, 2003, BONNIE SUE BAILEY and LLOYD LOUIS ENGLER committed the crime of possessing with the intent to distribute, and aiding and abetting the possession with the intent to distribute, approximately 9.24 grams of actual (pure) methamphetamine, a Schedule II Controlled Substance.

         Under Count 6, the Indictment charges that on or about October 13, 2003, BONNIE SUE BAILEY committed the crime of possessing a firearm in and affecting interstate commerce when she was an unlawful user of a controlled substance, that is, methamphetamine.

 

(CONTINUED)

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER (Cont’d.)

 

         Under Count 8, the Indictment charges that from at least 2002 through about March 2004, LLOYD LOUIS ENGLER committed the crime of managing or controlling any place as an owner, lessee, or occupant and made available for use, with or without compensation, the property located at 25236 Highway 128, Garnavillo, Clayton County, Iowa, for the purpose of unlawfully manufacturing, storing, distributing, and using methamphetamine, a Schedule II Controlled Substance.

         Each defendant has pleaded not guilty to each crime with which he or she is charged.

         As I told you at the beginning of the trial, an indictment is simply an accusation. It is not evidence of anything. To the contrary, each defendant is presumed to be innocent. Thus, each defendant, even though charged, begins the trial with no evidence against him or her. The presumption of innocence alone is sufficient to find a defendant not guilty and can be overcome only if the Government proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, each essential element of a crime charged.

         Keep in mind that you must give separate consideration to the evidence about each individual defendant. Each defendant is entitled to be treated separately, and you must return a separate verdict for each defendant. Also keep in mind that you must consider, separately, each crime charged against each individual defendant, and must return a separate verdict for each of those crimes charged.

           There is no burden upon a defendant to prove that he or she is innocent.

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         The crime of attempting to manufacture methamphetamine, a Schedule II Controlled Substance, as charged in Counts 1 and 3 of the Indictment, has three essential elements, which are:

         One,  on or about the date alleged in the Indictment [Count 1–July 16, 2003; Count 3–October 13, 2003], one or both defendants intended to manufacture methamphetamine;

 

         Two,  one or both defendants knew the material they intended to manufacture was a controlled substance, e.g., methamphetamine; and

 

         Three, one or both defendants voluntarily and intentionally carried out some act

                  which was a substantial step toward the manufacture of methamphetamine.

         A person may also be found guilty of attempting to manufacture methamphetamine even if he or she personally did not do every act constituting the offense charged, if he or she aided and abetted the commission of the crime of attempting to manufacture methamphetamine.

         In order to have aided and abetted the commission of a crime a person must:

         One,  have known the attempt to manufacture methamphetamine was being committed or going to be committed;

 

         Two,  have knowingly acted in some way for the purpose of causing, encouraging, or aiding the commission of the attempt to manufacture methamphetamine; and

 

         Three, have intended for the attempt to manufacture methamphetamine to occur.



(CONTINUED)


INSTRUCTION NUMBER (Cont’d.)

 

         For you to find either defendant guilty of attempting to manufacture methamphetamine by reason of aiding and abetting, the Government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that all of the essential elements of the attempt to manufacture methamphetamine were committed by some person or persons and that that defendant aided and abetted the commission of the crime.          

         You should understand that merely being present at the scene of the event, or merely acting in the same way as others or merely associating with others, does not prove that a person has become an aider and abettor of the attempt to manufacture methamphetamine or that a person attempted to manufacture methamphetamine. A person who has no knowledge that a crime is being committed or about to be committed, but who happens to act in a way which advances some offense, does not thereby become an aider and abettor.

         If all of these essential elements have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt as to either defendant, then you must find that defendant guilty of the crime charged as to the count under consideration by you; otherwise you must find that defendant not guilty of the crime charged as to the count under consideration by you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         The crime of possession of pseudoephedrine, as charged in Counts 2, 5, and 7 of the Indictment, has two essential elements, which are:

         One,  on or about the date alleged in the Indictment [Count 2–July 16, 2003; Count 5–October 13, 2003; Count 7–December 16, 2003], BONNIE SUE BAILEY knowingly possessed pseudoephedrine, a List I Chemical; and

 

         Two,  BONNIE SUE BAILEY knew or had reasonable cause to believe that the pseudoephedrine would be used to manufacture methamphetamine.


         If both of these essential elements have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt as to BONNIE SUE BAILEY, then you must find BONNIE SUE BAILEY guilty of the crime charged as to the count under consideration by you; otherwise you must find BONNIE SUE BAILEY not guilty of the crime charged as to the count under consideration by you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         The crime of possession of methamphetamine with the intent to distribute it, as charged in Count 4 of the Indictment, has three essential elements, which are:

         One,  on or about October 13, 2003, one or both defendants possessed methamphetamine, a Schedule II Controlled Substance;

 

         Two,  one or both defendants knew that they possessed methamphetamine; and

 

         Three, one or both defendants intended to distribute some or all of the

                  methamphetamine to another person.

         If you find these three elements unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt as to either defendant, then you must find that defendant guilty of the crime of possessing methamphetamine with the intent to distribute it. Record your determination on the appropriate Verdict Form which will be submitted to you with these instructions.

 

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         If your verdict on Instruction No. ___ as to either defendant charged under Count 4 is not guilty, or if, after all reasonable efforts, you are unable to reach a verdict as to either defendant on Instruction No. ___, you should record that decision on the appropriate Verdict Forms and go on to consider whether either defendant is guilty of the crime of possessing methamphetamine under this instruction.

         The crime of possessing methamphetamine, a lesser included offense of the crime charged in Count 4, has two essential elements, which are:

         One,  on or about October 13, 2003, one or both defendants possessed methamphetamine, a controlled substance; and

 

         Two,  the defendant under consideration knew he or she possessed methamphetamine.

         For you to find either defendant guilty of possessing methamphetamine, a lesser included offense under Count 4, the Government must prove both of the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt as to that defendant; otherwise you must find that defendant not guilty of this crime, a lesser included offense under Count 4. Record your determination on the appropriate Verdict Forms.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         A person may also be found guilty of possession with the intent to distribute methamphetamine as described in Instruction No. ___ even if he or she personally did not do every act constituting the offense charged, if he or she aided and abetted the commission of the crime of possession with the intent to distribute methamphetamine.

         In order to have aided and abetted the commission of a crime a person must:

         One,  have known the possession with the intent to distribute methamphetamine was being committed or going to be committed;

         Two,  have knowingly acted in some way for the purpose of aiding the commission of the possession with the intent to distribute methamphetamine; and

 

         Three, have intended for the possession with the intent to distribute

                  methamphetamine to occur.

         For you to find either defendant guilty of possession of methamphetamine with the intent to distribute it by reason of aiding and abetting, the Government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that all of the essential elements of the possession of methamphetamine with the intent to distribute it were committed by some person or persons and that that defendant aided and abetted the commission of that crime.    

         You should understand that merely being present at the scene of the event, or merely acting in the same way as others or merely associating with others, does not prove that a person has become an aider and abettor. A person who has no knowledge that a crime is being committed or about to be committed, but who happens to act in a way which advances some offense, does not thereby become an aider and abettor.

         If all of these essential elements have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt as to either defendant, then you must find that defendant guilty of the crime charged in Count 4; otherwise you must find that defendant not guilty of the crime charged in Count 4.

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         The crime of being an unlawful drug user in possession of a firearm, as charged in Count 6 of the Indictment, has three essential elements, which are:

         One,  on or about October 13, 2003, BONNIE SUE BAILEY was an unlawful user of a controlled substance, that is, methamphetamine;

 

         Two,  BONNIE SUE BAILEY knowingly possessed a firearm, that is, a .32 caliber handgun with the serial number scratched off, while she was an unlawful user of a controlled substance; and

 

         Three, the firearm was transported across a state line at some time during or before

                  BONNIE SUE BAILEY’s possession of it.

         If you have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the firearm in question was manufactured in a state other than Iowa and that BONNIE SUE BAILEY possessed the firearm in the State of Iowa, then you may, but are not required to, find that it was transported across a state line.

         The term “firearm” means any weapon (including a starter gun) which will or is designed to or may be readily converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive.          The term “user of a controlled substance” means a person who uses a controlled substance in a manner other than as prescribed by a licensed physician. BONNIE SUE BAILEY must have been actively engaged in use of a controlled substance during the period of time she possessed the firearm, but the law does not require that she used the controlled substance at the precise time she possessed the firearm. An inference that a person was a user of a controlled substance may be drawn from evidence of a pattern of use or possession of a controlled substance that reasonably covers the time the firearm was possessed.

(CONTINUED)


INSTRUCTION NUMBER (Cont’d.)

 

         If all of these essential elements have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt as to BONNIE SUE BAILEY, then you must find her guilty of the crime charged in Count 6; otherwise you must find her not guilty of the crime charged in Count 6.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         The crime of maintaining a place for the purpose of manufacturing, distributing, storing, and using a controlled substance, as charged in Count 8 of the Indictment, has two essential elements, which are:

         One,  from at least 2002 through about March 2004, LLOYD LOUIS ENGLER knowingly maintained the property located at 25236 Highway 128, Garnavillo, Clayton County, Iowa; and

 

         Two,  LLOYD LOUIS ENGLER did so for the purpose of manufacturing, storing, distributing, and/or using methamphetamine, a Schedule II Controlled Substance.

         The specific purpose need not be the sole purpose for which the place is used, but it must be one of the primary or principal uses for which the place is used. 

         If all of these essential elements have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt as to LLOYD LOUIS ENGLER, then you must find him guilty of the crime charged in Count 8; otherwise you must find him not guilty of the crime charged in Count 8.

           


INSTRUCTION NUMBER _____

 

         You are instructed as a matter of law that methamphetamine is a Schedule II Controlled Substance. You must ascertain whether or not the substances in question in this case were methamphetamine. In so doing, you may consider all the evidence in the case which may aid in the determination of that issue.

         In determining whether either defendant is guilty of possessing methamphetamine with the intent to distribute it as charged in Count 4, the Government is not required to prove that the amount or quantity of the controlled substance was as charged in the Indictment. The United States need only prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there was a measurable amount of the controlled substance.

         However, if you find either defendant guilty of the offense, you will be asked a special interrogatory about the quantity of methamphetamine involved in the offense. The burden of proof is on the Government to establish the quantity beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

 

 

 

 

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         The offenses charged in Counts 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7 of the Indictment involve the “possession” of a controlled substance. The following definitions apply in these instructions:

         The law recognizes several kinds of possession. A person may have “actual” possession or “constructive” possession. A person may have “sole” or “joint” possession.

         A person who knowingly has direct physical control over a thing at a given time is in “actual” possession of it.

         A person who, although not in actual possession, has both the power and intention at a given time to exercise dominion and control over a thing, either directly or through another person or persons, is in “constructive” possession of it.

         If one person alone has actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is “sole.” If two or more persons share actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is “joint.”

         Whenever the word “possession” has been used in these instructions, it includes “actual” as well as “constructive” possession and also “sole” as well as “joint” possession.

          


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         The offenses charged in Counts 4 and 8 of the Indictment involve the “distribution” of a controlled substance. The following definitions apply in these instructions:

         The term “distribute” means to deliver a controlled substance to the actual or constructive possession of another person. The term “deliver” means the actual, constructive, or attempted transfer of a controlled substance to the possession of another person. No consideration for the delivery need exist, and it is not necessary that money or anything of value change hands. The law is directed at the act of “distribution” of a controlled substance and does not concern itself with any need for a “sale” to occur.

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         You will note the Indictment charges that the offenses were committed “on or about” or “from at least . . . through about” certain dates. The Government need not prove with certainty the exact date or the exact time period of an offense charged. It is sufficient if the evidence established that an offense occurred within a reasonable time of the date or period of time alleged by the Indictment.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         An act is done “knowingly” if a defendant realized what he or she was doing and did not act through ignorance, mistake or accident. The Government is not required to prove that a defendant knew that his or her acts or omissions were unlawful. You may consider the evidence of a defendant’s acts and words, along with all other evidence, in deciding whether a defendant acted knowingly.

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         Intent may be proven by circumstantial evidence. It rarely can be established by other means. While witnesses may see or hear and thus be able to give direct evidence of what a person does or fails to do, there can be no eyewitness account of the state of mind with which the acts were done or omitted. But what a defendant does or fails to do may indicate intent or lack of intent to commit an offense.

         You may consider it reasonable to draw the inference and find that a person intends the natural and probable consequences of acts knowingly done, but you are not required to do so. As I have said, it is entirely up to you to decide what facts to find from the evidence.


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         Throughout the trial, you have been permitted to take notes. Your notes should be used only as memory aids, and you should not give your notes precedence over your independent recollection of the evidence.

         In any conflict between your notes, a fellow juror’s notes, and your memory, your memory must prevail. Remember that notes sometimes contain the mental impressions of the note taker and can be used only to help you recollect what the testimony was. At the conclusion of your deliberations, your notes should be left in the jury room for destruction.

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         In conducting your deliberations and returning your verdict, there are certain rules you must follow. I shall list those rules for you now.

         First, when you go to the jury room, you must select one of your members as your foreperson. That person will preside over your discussions and speak for you here in court.

         Second, it is your duty, as jurors, to discuss this case with one another in the jury room. You should try to reach an agreement if you can do so without violence to individual judgment, because a verdict - whether guilty or not guilty - must be unanimous.

         Each of you must make your own conscientious decision, but only after you have considered all the evidence, discussed it fully with your fellow jurors, and listened to the views of your fellow jurors.

         Do not be afraid to change your opinions if the discussion persuades you that you should. But do not come to a decision simply because other jurors think it is right, or simply to reach a verdict.

         Third, if you find one or both of the defendants guilty, the sentence to be imposed is my responsibility. You may not consider punishment in any way in deciding whether the Government has proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

 

 

(CONTINUED)


INSTRUCTION NUMBER (Cont’d.)

 

         Fourth, if you need to communicate with me during your deliberations, you may send a note to me through the marshal or court security officer, signed by one or more

jurors. I will respond as soon as possible either in writing or orally in open court. Remember that you should not tell anyone – including me – how your votes stand numerically.

         Finally, your verdict must be based solely on the evidence and on the law which I have given to you in my instructions. The verdict, whether guilty or not guilty, must be unanimous. Nothing I have said or done is intended to suggest what your verdict should be – that is entirely for you to decide.

 


INSTRUCTION NUMBER

 

         Attached to these instructions you will find the Verdict Forms. A Verdict Form is simply a written notice of a decision that you reach in this case. The answer to each Verdict Form must be the unanimous decision of the jury.

         You will take these Verdict Forms to the jury room, and when you have completed your deliberations and each of you has agreed on an answer to each Verdict Form, your foreperson will fill out each Form, sign and date it, and advise the marshal or court security officer that you are ready to return to the courtroom.

         Finally, members of the jury, take this case and give it your most careful consideration, and then without fear or favor, prejudice or bias of any kind, return such verdict as accords with the evidence and these instructions.

 

 

 

 

 

__________                                                __________________________________

DATE                                                        LINDA R. READE

                                                                 JUDGE, U. S. DISTRICT COURT

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

EASTERN DIVISION

 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

No. CR 04-1003

vs.

VERDICT FORM - COUNT 1

BONNIE SUE BAILEY,

Defendant.

____________________

 

 

         We, the Jury, find the defendant, Bonnie Sue Bailey,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of attempting to manufacture and aiding and abetting the attempt to manufacture methamphetamine on or about July 16, 2003, as charged in Count 1 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

EASTERN DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

No. CR 04-1003

vs.

VERDICT FORM - COUNT 2

BONNIE SUE BAILEY,

Defendant.

____________________

 

 

          We, the Jury, find the defendant, Bonnie Sue Bailey,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of possessing pseudoephedrine on or about July 16, 2003, knowing, intending, and having reasonable cause to believe that the pseudoephedrine would be used to manufacture methamphetamine, as charged in Count 2 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

 

 

 

 

 


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

EASTERN DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

No. CR 04-1003

vs.

VERDICT FORM - COUNT 3

BONNIE SUE BAILEY,

Defendant.

____________________

 

 

          We, the Jury, find the defendant, Bonnie Sue Bailey,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of attempting to manufacture and aiding and abetting the attempt to manufacture methamphetamine on or about October 13, 2003, as charged in Count 3 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

EASTERN DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

No. CR 04-1003

vs.

VERDICT FORM - COUNT 4

BONNIE SUE BAILEY,

Defendant.

____________________

 

 

          We, the Jury, find the defendant, Bonnie Sue Bailey,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of possessing, and aiding and abetting the possession of, methamphetamine with the intent to distribute it on or about October 13, 2003, as charged in Count 4 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

DRUG QUANTITY DETERMINATION

          If you found Bonnie Sue Bailey guilty of Count 4, what quantity of actual (pure) methamphetamine do you unanimously find was involved?

 

(CONTINUED)

 

 


_____ 5 grams or more of actual (pure) methamphetamine

 

_____ less than 5 grams of actual (pure) methamphetamine

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

Note: If you unanimously find Bonnie Sue Bailey guilty of the above crime, have your foreperson write “guilty” in the above blank space, sign and date this Verdict Form. Do not consider the following question on this Verdict Form.

 

If you unanimously find Bonnie Sue Bailey not guilty of the above charge, have your foreperson write “not guilty” in the above blank space. You must then consider whether Bonnie Sue Bailey is guilty of possessing methamphetamine in response to the following question on this Verdict Form.

 

 

LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSE

          We, the Jury, find the defendant, Bonnie Sue Bailey,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of possessing methamphetamine on or about October 13, 2003, as charged in Count 4 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

EASTERN DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

No. CR 04-1003

vs.

VERDICT FORM - COUNT 5

BONNIE SUE BAILEY,

Defendant.

____________________

 

 

          We, the Jury, find the defendant, Bonnie Sue Bailey,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of possessing pseudoephedrine on or about October 13, 2003, knowing, intending, and having reasonable cause to believe that the pseudoephedrine would be used to manufacture methamphetamine, as charged in Count 5 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

 

 

 

 


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

EASTERN DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

No. CR 04-1003

vs.

VERDICT FORM - COUNT 6

BONNIE SUE BAILEY,

Defendant.

____________________

 

 

          We, the Jury, find the defendant, Bonnie Sue Bailey,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of being an unlawful user of methamphetamine in possession of a firearm on or about October 13, 2003, as charged in Count 6 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

EASTERN DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

No. CR 04-1003

vs.

VERDICT FORM - COUNT 7

BONNIE SUE BAILEY,

Defendant.

____________________

 

 

          We, the Jury, find the defendant, Bonnie Sue Bailey,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of possessing pseudoephedrine on or about December 16, 2003, knowing, intending, and having reasonable cause to believe that the pseudoephedrine would be used to manufacture methamphetamine, as charged in Count 7 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

 

 

 

 


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

EASTERN DIVISION

 

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

No. CR 04-1003

vs.

VERDICT FORM - COUNT 1

LLOYD LOUIS ENGLER,

Defendant.

____________________

 

 

          We, the Jury, find the defendant, Lloyd Louis Engler,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of attempting to manufacture and aiding and abetting the attempt to manufacture methamphetamine on or about July 16, 2003, as charged in Count 1 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

No. CR 04-1003

vs.

VERDICT FORM - COUNT 3

LLOYD LOUIS ENGLER,

Defendant.

____________________

 

 

          We, the Jury, find the defendant, Lloyd Louis Engler,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of attempting to manufacture and aiding and abetting the attempt to manufacture methamphetamine on or about October 13, 2003, as charged in Count 3 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

No. CR 04-1003

vs.

VERDICT FORM - COUNT 4

LLOYD LOUIS ENGLER,

Defendant.

____________________

 

          We, the Jury, find the defendant, Lloyd Louis Engler,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of possessing, and aiding and abetting the possession of, methamphetamine with the intent to distribute it on or about October 13, 2003, as charged in Count 4 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

DRUG QUANTITY DETERMINATION

          If you found Lloyd Louis Engler guilty of Count 4, what quantity of actual (pure) methamphetamine do you unanimously find was involved?

(CONTINUED)

 

 

 


                   _____ 5 grams or more of actual (pure) methamphetamine

 

_____ less than 5 grams of actual (pure) methamphetamine

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

Note: If you unanimously find Lloyd Louis Engler guilty of the above crime, have your foreperson write “guilty” in the above blank space, sign and date this Verdict Form. Do not consider the following question on this Verdict Form.

 

If you unanimously find Lloyd Louis Engler not guilty of the above charge, have your foreperson write “not guilty” in the above blank space. You must then consider whether Lloyd Louis Engler is guilty of possessing methamphetamine in response to the following question on this Verdict Form.

 

 

LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSE

 

          We, the Jury, find the defendant, Lloyd Louis Engler,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of possessing methamphetamine on or about October 13, 2003, as charged in Count 4 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE

 

 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 

Plaintiff,

No. CR 04-1003

vs.

VERDICT FORM - COUNT 8

LLOYD LOUIS ENGLER,

Defendant.

____________________

 

 

          We, the Jury, find the defendant, Lloyd Louis Engler,____________of the crime       Guilty/Not Guilty

of maintaining a place for the purpose of manufacturing, storing, distributing, and using methamphetamine from at least 2002 through about March 2004, as charged in Count 8 of the Indictment.

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             FOREPERSON

 

                                                             __________________________________

                                                             DATE