IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

CENTRAL DIVISION





UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,

No. CR 02-3015-MWB

vs.

REVISED

INSTRUCTIONS

TO THE JURY

JUAN SERENO ARREOLA and HOMERO BUSTOS FLORES,
Defendants.






TABLE OF CONTENTS

INSTRUCTIONS 1

NO. 1 - INTRODUCTION 1

NO. 2 - POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE 3

NO. 3 - "POSSESSION," "DISTRIBUTION," AND "DELIVERY" 5

NO. 4 - QUANTITY OF METHAMPHETAMINE 7

NO. 5 - SPECIFIC DEFENSE 9

NO. 6 - PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE AND BURDEN OF PROOF 11

NO. 7 - REASONABLE DOUBT 12

NO. 8 - DEFINITION OF EVIDENCE 13

NO. 9 - VIDEOTAPE-RECORDED CONVERSATION 14

NO. 10 - CREDIBILITY AND IMPEACHMENT 15

NO. 11 - NOTE-TAKING 17

NO. 12 - CONDUCT OF THE JURY DURING TRIAL 18

NO. 13 - DUTY TO DELIBERATE 20

NO. 14 - DUTY DURING DELIBERATIONS 22



VERDICT FORM



INSTRUCTION NO. 1 - INTRODUCTION



Members of the jury, consider these instructions, together with any oral instructions that I may give to you during the trial, and apply them as a whole to the facts of the case. In considering these instructions, the order in which they are given is not important.

In the indictment in this case, a Grand Jury charges defendants Juan Sereno Arreola and Homero Bustos Flores with knowingly and intentionally possessing with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine. As I explained during jury selection, an indictment is simply an accusation. It is not evidence of anything. The defendants have pleaded not guilty to the charge brought against them; therefore, each defendant is presumed to be innocent unless and until the prosecution proves his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on the charge against him.

Your duty is to decide from the evidence whether the defendants are not guilty or guilty of the crime charged against them. You will find the facts from the evidence. You are entitled to consider that evidence in light of your own observations and experiences. You may use reason and common sense to draw conclusions from facts that have been established by the evidence. You will then apply the law, which I will give you in my instructions, to the facts to reach your verdict. You are the sole judges of the facts; but you must follow the law as stated in my instructions, whether you agree with it or not.

Do not allow sympathy or prejudice to influence you. The law demands of you a just verdict, based solely on the evidence, your common sense, and the law as I give it to you. Do not take anything I may say or do during the trial as indicating what I think of the evidence or what I think your verdict should be. Similarly, do not conclude from any ruling or other comment I may make that I have any opinions on how you should decide the case.

Please remember that only defendants Juan Sereno Arreola and Homero Bustos Flores, not anyone else, are on trial here. Also, remember that each defendant is on trial only for the crime charged against him, not for anything else.

Finally, you must give separate consideration to the evidence about each defendant. Each defendant is entitled to be treated separately and to have the charge against him considered separately. Therefore, you must return a separate, unanimous verdict on the charge against each defendant.

INSTRUCTION NO. 2 - POSSESSION WITH INTENT

TO DISTRIBUTE





The offense charged in this case consist of "elements," which the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt in order to convict a defendant of that offense. For you to find a particular defendant guilty of the offense charged in the indictment, the government must prove the following three essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt as to that defendant:

One, on or about February 27, 2002, the defendant was in possession of methamphetamine.

The indictment charges that the offense was committed "on or about" a certain date. The prosecution does not have to prove with certainty the exact date of the offense charged. It is sufficient if the evidence establishes that the offense occurred within a reasonable time of the date alleged in the indictment.

"Possession" is defined for you in Instruction No. 3. You must ascertain whether or not the substance in question was in fact methamphetamine, as specified in the indictment.



Two, the defendant knew that he was, or intended to be, in possession of a controlled substance.

"Intent" and "knowledge" may be proved like anything else. You may consider the evidence of the defendant's words, acts, or omissions, along with all of the facts and circumstances in evidence that may aid in your determination of the defendant's "knowledge" or "intent." An act is done "knowingly" if the defendant is aware of the act and does not act through ignorance, mistake, or accident. The prosecution is not required to prove that the defendant knew that his acts or omissions were unlawful.

Additionally, the defendant need not know what the controlled substance is if the defendant knows that he has possession of some controlled substance. A "controlled substance" is any drug or narcotic the manufacture, possession, possession with intent to distribute, or distribution, of which is prohibited or regulated by federal law. Methamphetamine is a controlled substance.



Three, the defendant intended to distribute some or all of the controlled substance to another person.

Again, "intent" was defined for you just above, in reference to element two. Possession of a large quantity of a controlled substance is evidence from which you may, but are not required to, infer that the possessor intended to distribute the controlled substance. The term "distribute" is defined for you in Instruction No. 3.



For you to find a particular defendant guilty of the crime of possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute it, as charged in the indictment, the government must prove all of the essential elements of this offense beyond a reasonable doubt as to that defendant; otherwise, you must find that defendant not guilty of the offense charged in the indictment.

INSTRUCTION NO. 3 - "POSSESSION," "DISTRIBUTION,"

AND "DELIVERY"





The offense charged involves "possession," and intended "distribution" or "delivery" of a controlled substance. The following definitions of these terms apply in these instructions:

The law recognizes several kinds of "possession." A person who knowingly has direct physical control over a thing, at a given time, is then in "actual possession" of it. A person who, although not in actual possession, has both the power and the intention at a given time to exercise control over a thing, either directly or through another person or persons, is then 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.

In addition, mere presence where a thing was found or mere physical proximity to the thing is insufficient to establish "possession" of that thing. Knowledge of the presence of the thing, at the same time one has control over the thing or the place in which it was found, is required. Thus, in order to establish "possession" of a thing, in addition to knowledge of the presence of the thing, the prosecution must establish that, at the same time, (a) the person intended to exercise control over the thing or place in which it was found; (b) the person had the power to exercise control over the thing or place in which it was found; and (c) the person knew that he had the power to exercise control over the thing or place in which it was found.

Therefore, 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 actual or constructive possession of another person. It is not necessary that money or anything of value change hands. The law prohibits "possession with intent to distribute" a controlled substance; the prosecution does not have to prove that there was or was intended to be a "sale" of a controlled substance to prove "possession with intent to distribute" a controlled substance.

INSTRUCTION NO. 4 - QUANTITY OF METHAMPHETAMINE





The indictment charges that the "possession with intent to distribute" offense involved 500 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine. The prosecution does not have to prove that the offense involved the amount or quantity of methamphetamine charged in the indictment for you to find a defendant guilty of that offense, although the prosecution must prove that the controlled substance involved in the offense was, in fact, methamphetamine. If the prosecution proves that a defendant is guilty of the offense charged, then the prosecution must also prove beyond a reasonable doubt the quantity of methamphetamine actually involved in the offense for which that defendant can be held responsible.

Therefore, you must determine, beyond a reasonable doubt, (i) whether or not the controlled substance involved in the offense was in fact methamphetamine, as charged in the indictment, and if it was, (ii) the amount of the methamphetamine involved in the offense for which a defendant guilty of that offense can be held responsible. In so doing, you may consider all of the evidence in the case that may aid in the determination of these issues.

A defendant guilty of possessing methamphetamine with intent to distribute it, as charged in the indictment, and explained in Instruction No. 2, is responsible for the quantity of methamphetamine that he possessed with intent to distribute. You must determine the total quantity of the methamphetamine involved the offense for which such a defendant can be held responsible and indicate in the Verdict Form the range within which that total quantity falls. You must determine that total quantity in terms of grams of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine. In making your determination of quantity as required, it may be helpful to remember that one pound is approximately equal to 453.6 grams, and that one ounce is approximately equal to 28.35 grams.

Again, you must determine beyond a reasonable doubt (i) whether or not the controlled substance involved in the offense was in fact methamphetamine, as charged in the indictment, and if it was, (ii) the amount of the methamphetamine involved in the offense for which a defendant guilty of that offense can be held responsible.

INSTRUCTION NO. 5 - SPECIFIC DEFENSE



The defendants each assert, as a specific defense, that they had no knowledge that there was any methamphetamine in the car in which it was found.

Defendant Juan Sereno Arreola contends that he did not have any knowledge of the methamphetamine found in the car that he was driving and that someone else placed the controlled substances there. Again, you were instructed in Instruction No. 3 that mere presence where an item was found or mere physical proximity to the item is insufficient to establish "possession" of that item. Knowledge of the presence of the item, at the same time one has control over the item or the place in which it was found, is required. Therefore, if the evidence shows that defendant Juan Sereno Arreola was merely driving the vehicle, but did not know of the presence of the methamphetamine, then you cannot find him guilty of possession of the methamphetamine with intent to distribute it. However, if you find that he knew of the presence of the methamphetamine at the same time he had control over the vehicle in which it was found, and that he intended to distribute some or all of the methamphetamine to another person, then you may find that he committed the offense charged.

Defendant Homero Bustos Flores contends that he was only a passenger in a car insured and driven by Juan Sereno Arreola and that he, therefore, had no knowledge that any methamphetamine was in the car. Mere presence as a passenger in a car from which the police recover methamphetamine does not establish the passenger's possession of the methamphetamine or that the passenger intended to distribute it. As I instructed you in Instruction No. 3, knowledge of the presence of the item, plus control over the item or the place in which it was found, is required to establish "possession." Therefore, if you find that the evidence shows that defendant Homero Bustos Flores was nothing more than a mere passenger, he cannot be found to have possessed the methamphetamine with intent to distributed it. However, if his presence in the vehicle was accompanied by additional evidence that permits the inference that he knew of the presence of the methamphetamine, had control over it, and that he intended to distribute some or all of the methamphetamine to another person, then you may find that he committed the offense charged.

Remember that the burden never shifts to a defendant in a criminal case to prove his specific defense or otherwise to prove his innocence.

INSTRUCTION NO. 6 - PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE

AND BURDEN OF PROOF





Defendants Juan Sereno Arreola and Homero Bustos Flores are each presumed innocent and, therefore, not guilty. This presumption of innocence requires you to put aside all suspicion that might arise from the arrest or charge of these defendants or the fact that they are here in court. The presumption of innocence remains with each defendant throughout the trial. That presumption alone is sufficient to find a defendant not guilty. The presumption of innocence may be overcome as to a particular defendant only if the prosecution proves, beyond a reasonable doubt, each element of the crime charged against him.

The burden is always upon the prosecution to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This burden never shifts to any defendant to prove his innocence, for the law never imposes upon a defendant in a criminal case the burden or duty of calling any witnesses or producing any evidence. Therefore, if a defendant does not testify, you must not consider that fact in any way, or even discuss it, in arriving at your verdict. A defendant is not even obligated to produce any evidence by cross-examining the witnesses who are called to testify by the prosecution.

Unless the prosecution proves beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant has committed each and every essential element of the offense charged in the indictment against him, you must find that defendant not guilty of that offense.

INSTRUCTION NO. 7 - REASONABLE DOUBT



I have previously instructed you that the prosecution must prove the charges against these defendants "beyond a reasonable doubt." A reasonable doubt may arise from the evidence produced by any of the parties, keeping in mind that a defendant never has the burden or duty of calling any witnesses or producing any evidence. It may also arise from the prosecution's lack of evidence. 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 in the more serious and important transactions of life. However, proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean proof beyond all possible doubt.

INSTRUCTION NO. 8 - DEFINITION OF EVIDENCE



Your verdict must be based only on the evidence and these and other instructions that I may give you during the trial.

Evidence is:

1. Testimony.

2. Exhibits that I admit into evidence.

3. Stipulations, which are agreements between the parties.

Evidence may be "direct" or "circumstantial." The law makes no distinction between the weight to be given to direct and circumstantial evidence. The weight to be given any evidence is for you to decide.

A particular item of evidence is sometimes admitted only for a limited purpose, and not for any other purpose. I will tell you if that happens, and instruct you on the purposes for which the item can and cannot be used.

The fact that an exhibit may be shown to you does not mean that you must rely on it more than you rely on other evidence.

The following are not evidence:

1. Statements, arguments, questions, and comments by the lawyers.

2. Objections and rulings on objections.

3. Testimony I tell you to disregard.

4. Anything you saw or heard about this case outside the courtroom.

The weight of the evidence is not determined by the number of witnesses testifying as to the existence or non-existence of any fact. Also, the weight of the evidence should not be determined merely by the number or volume of documents or exhibits. The weight of evidence depends on its quality, not quantity. The quality and weight of the evidence are for you to decide.

INSTRUCTION NO. 9 - VIDEOTAPE-RECORDED CONVERSATION



As part of the evidence in this case, you may view a videotape recording. The conversations on the recording were legally recorded, and you may consider the recording just like any other evidence.

The videotape recording may be accompanied by a typed transcript. A transcript, if present, may also undertake to identify the speakers engaged in the conversation. However, the identity of the speakers as set out in the transcript is not evidence; rather, it is merely the opinion of the person who transcribed the tape.

You are permitted to view a transcript for the purpose of helping you follow the conversation as you view the recording, to help you keep track of the speakers, and also for the purpose of translating statements from Spanish into English. A recording itself is the primary evidence of its own contents. Where the discussions were in English, the transcript is not evidence. On the other hand, where the discussions were in Spanish, the transcript of the discussions as translated into English is evidence, and you may consider it like any other evidence during your deliberations.

Even where the transcript is evidence, you are specifically instructed that whether the transcript correctly or incorrectly reflects the conversation or the identity of the speakers is entirely for you to decide based upon what you may hear about the preparation of the transcript and upon your own examination of the transcript in relation to what you hear on the recording. If you decide that a transcript is in any respect incorrect or unreliable, you should disregard it to that extent.

Differences in meaning between what you hear in a recording and read in a transcript, if available, may be caused by such things as the inflection in a speaker's voice. You should, therefore, rely on what you hear rather than what you read when there is a difference.

INSTRUCTION NO. 10 - CREDIBILITY AND IMPEACHMENT



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 says, 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 witness's drug or alcohol use or addiction, if any, 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 see or hear things differently and sometimes forget things. You need to consider, therefore, whether a contradiction results from an innocent misrecollection or sincere lapse of memory, or instead from an intentional falsehood or pretended lapse of memory.

If a defendant testifies, you should judge his testimony in the same manner in which you judge the testimony of any other witness.

Ordinarily, witnesses may only testify to factual matters within their personal knowledge. However, you may hear evidence from persons described as experts. Persons may become qualified as experts in some field by knowledge, skill, training, education, or experience. Such experts may state their opinions on matters in that field and may also state the reasons for their opinions. You should consider expert testimony just like any other testimony. You may believe all of what an expert says, only part of it, or none of it, considering the expert's qualifications, the soundness of the reasons given for the opinion, the acceptability of the methods used, any reason the expert may be biased, and all of the other evidence in the case.

Just because a witness works in law enforcement or is employed by the government does not mean you should give more weight or credence to such a witness's testimony than you give to any other witness's testimony.

A witness may be discredited or impeached by contradictory evidence; by a showing that the witness testified falsely concerning a material matter; 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. If earlier statements of a witness were admitted into evidence, they were not admitted to prove that the contents of those statements were true. Instead, you may consider those earlier statements only to determine whether you think they are consistent or inconsistent with the trial testimony of the witness, and therefore whether they affect the credibility of that witness.

If you believe that a witness has been discredited or impeached, it is your exclusive right to give that witness's testimony whatever weight you think it deserves.

INSTRUCTION NO. 11 - NOTE-TAKING



If you want to take notes during the trial, you may, but be sure that your note-taking does not interfere with listening to and considering all the evidence. If you choose not to take notes, remember it is your own individual responsibility to listen carefully to the evidence.

Notes you take during the trial are not necessarily more reliable than your memory or another juror's memory. Therefore, you should not be overly influenced by the notes.

If you take notes, do not discuss them with anyone before you begin your deliberations. At the end of each day, please leave your notes on your chair. At the end of the trial, you may take your notes out of the notebook and keep them, or leave them, and we will destroy them. No one will read the notes, either during or after the trial.

You will notice that we have an official court reporter making a record of the trial. However, we will not have typewritten transcripts of this record available for your use in reaching your verdict.

INSTRUCTION NO. 12 - CONDUCT OF THE JURY

DURING TRIAL





To insure fairness, you as jurors must obey the following rules:

First, do not talk among yourselves about this case, or about anyone involved with it, until the end of the case when you go to the jury room to decide on your verdict.

Second, do not talk with anyone else about this case, or about anyone involved with it, until the trial has ended and you have been discharged as jurors.

Third, when you are outside the courtroom do not let anyone tell you anything about the case, or about anyone involved with it until the trial has ended and your verdict has been accepted by me. If someone should try to talk to you about the case during the trial, please report it to me.

Fourth, during the trial you should not talk with or speak to any of the parties, lawyers, or witnesses involved in this case--you should not even pass the time of day with any of them. It is important that you not only do justice in this case, but that you also give the appearance of doing justice. If a person from one side of the case sees you talking to a person from the other side--even if it is simply to pass the time of day--an unwarranted and unnecessary suspicion about your fairness might be aroused. If any lawyer, party, or witness does not speak to you when you pass in the hall, ride the elevator or the like, it is because they are not supposed to talk or visit with you.

Fifth, do not read any news stories or articles about the case, or about anyone involved with it, or listen to any radio or television reports about the case or about anyone involved with it. If you want, you can have your spouse or a friend clip out any stories and set them aside to give you after the trial is over. I can assure you, however, that by the time you have heard the evidence in this case you will know more about the matter than anyone will learn through the news media.

Sixth, do not do any research--on the Internet, in libraries, in the newspapers, or in any other way--or make any investigation about this case on your own. You must decide this case based on the evidence presented in court.

Seventh, do not make up your mind during the trial about what the verdict should be. Keep an open mind until after you have gone to the jury room to decide the case and you and your fellow jurors have discussed the evidence.

Eighth, if at anytime during the trial you have a problem that you would like to bring to my attention, or if you feel ill or need to go to the restroom, please send a note to the Court Security Officer, who will deliver it to me. I want you to be comfortable, so please do not hesitate to inform me of any problem.

I will reserve the remaining instructions until after the evidence has been presented and the prosecution and the defense have made their closing arguments to summarize and interpret the evidence for you. However, I remind you that closing arguments, like opening statements, are not evidence.

INSTRUCTION NO. 13 - DUTY TO DELIBERATE



Now that you have heard the evidence and arguments of the prosecution and defense, it is time for you to retire to deliberate on your verdict. However, before you do so, I must give you some instructions on deliberations.

A verdict must represent the considered judgment of each juror. Your verdict must be unanimous. It is your duty to consult with one another and to deliberate with a view to reaching agreement if you can do so without violence to your individual judgment. Of course, you must not surrender your honest convictions as to the weight or effect of the evidence solely because of the opinions of other jurors or for the mere purpose of returning a verdict. Each of you must decide the case for yourself; but you should do so only after consideration of the evidence with your fellow jurors.

In the course of your deliberations you should not hesitate to re-examine your own views, and to change your opinion if you are convinced it is wrong. To bring twelve minds to an unanimous result, you must examine the questions submitted to you openly and frankly, with proper regard for the opinions of others and with a willingness to re-examine your own views.

Remember that if, in your individual judgment, the evidence fails to establish a particular defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on the offense charged against him, then that defendant should have your vote for a not guilty verdict on that offense. If all of you reach the same conclusion, then the verdict of the jury must be not guilty for that defendant on that offense. Of course, the opposite also applies. If, in your individual judgment, the evidence establishes a particular defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on the offense charged, then your vote should be for a verdict of guilty against that defendant on that charge, and if all of you reach that conclusion, then the verdict of the jury must be guilty for that defendant on that charge. As I instructed you earlier, the burden is upon the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt every essential element of the crime charged against each defendant.

Remember, also, that the question before you can never be whether the government wins or loses the case. The government, as well as society, always wins, regardless of whether your verdict is not guilty or guilty, when justice is done.

Finally, remember that you are not partisans; you are judges--judges of the facts. Your sole interest is to seek the truth from the evidence. You are the judges of the credibility of the witnesses and the weight of the evidence.

You may conduct your deliberations as you choose. However, I suggest that you carefully consider all of the evidence bearing upon the questions before you. You may take all the time that you feel is necessary.

There is no reason to think that another trial would be tried in a better way or that a more conscientious, impartial, or competent jury would be selected to hear it. Any future jury must be selected in the same manner and from the same source as you. If you should fail to agree on a verdict, the case is left open and must be disposed of at some later time.

INSTRUCTION NO. 14 - DUTY DURING DELIBERATIONS



There are certain rules you must follow while conducting your deliberations and returning your verdict:

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, if a defendant is guilty, the sentence to be imposed is my responsibility. You may not consider punishment of Juan Sereno Arreola or Homero Bustos Flores in any way in deciding whether the prosecution has proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Third, if you need to communicate with me during your deliberations, you may send a note to me through the 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.

Fourth, your verdict must be based solely on the evidence and on the law in these instructions. The verdict, whether not guilty or 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.

Finally, I am giving you the verdict form. A verdict form is simply the written notice of the decision that you reach in this case. Your verdict must be unanimous. You will take the verdict form to the jury room. When you have reached a unanimous verdict, your foreperson must complete one copy of the verdict form and all of you must sign that copy to record your individual agreement with the verdict and to show that it is unanimous. The foreperson must bring the signed verdict form to the courtroom when it is time to announce your verdict. When you have reached a verdict, the foreperson will advise the Court Security Officer that you are ready to return to the courtroom.

DATED this ___th day of January, 2003.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA

CENTRAL DIVISION



UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,

No. CR 02-3015-MWB

vs.



VERDICT FORM

(01/10/03 VERSION)

JUAN SERENO ARREOLA and HOMERO BUSTOS FLORES,
Defendants.

____________________



I. JUAN SERENO ARREOLA

We, the Jury, unanimously find defendant Juan Sereno Arreola not guilty or guilty as follows:

POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE METHAMPHETAMINE VERDICT
Step 1: On the charge of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, as explained in Instruction No. 2, please mark your verdict. ____ Not Guilty

____ Guilty

Step 2: If you have found defendant Juan Sereno Arreola guilty of this offense, please indicate the quantity of methamphetamine actually involved in the conspiracy for which the defendant can be held responsible. (Determinations regarding quantity of methamphetamine are explained in Instruction No. 4.)
_____ 500 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine
_____ 50 grams or more, but less than 500, of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine
_____ Less than 50 grams of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine




________________

Date

_______________________________

Foreperson

_______________________________

Juror







_______________________________

Juror







_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror







I. HOMERO BUSTOS FLORES

We, the Jury, unanimously find defendant Homero Bustos Flores not guilty or guilty as follows:

POSSESSION WITH INTENT TO DISTRIBUTE METHAMPHETAMINE VERDICT
Step 1: On the charge of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, as explained in Instruction No. 2, please mark your verdict. ____ Not Guilty

____ Guilty

Step 2: If you have found defendant Homero Bustos Flores guilty of this offense, please indicate the quantity of methamphetamine actually involved in the conspiracy for which the defendant can be held responsible. (Determinations regarding quantity of methamphetamine are explained in Instruction No. 4.)
_____ 500 grams or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine
_____ 50 grams or more, but less than 500, of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine
_____ Less than 50 grams of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine




________________

Date

_______________________________

Foreperson

_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror



_______________________________

Juror