[Insert instructions for underlying offense.]

If you all agree the state has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the [number] elements listed above, you must next consider whether the defendant is not guilty because his use of force was justified by the defense of another person.

Defense of Another Person

A person’s use of force against another that constitutes the crime of [offense] is justified by the defense of another person if—

1. the person reasonably believed another was using or attempting to use unlawful force against a third individual;
2. under the circumstances as the person reasonably believed them to be, the third individual would be entitled to defend himself against this unlawful force; and
3. the person reasonably believed that his intervention was immediately necessary to protect the third individual from the unlawful force.

Whether a person is permitted to use force or deadly force to protect himself against unlawful force is determined by the law of self-defense.

Under the law of self-defense, a person is entitled to use force to defend himself if the person reasonably believes—

[Insert all applicable aspects of self-defense law, e.g.:

1. another was using or attempting to use unlawful force against the person; and

2. the person’s conduct was immediately necessary to protect himself against that force.]

Burden of Proof

The defendant is not required to prove that defense of another applies to this case. Rather, the state must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defense of another does not apply to the defendant’s conduct.

Definition

Reasonable Belief

“Reasonable belief” means a belief that an ordinary and prudent person would have held in the same circumstances as the defendant.

Application of Law to Facts

To decide the issue of defense of another, you must determine whether the state has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, one of the following elements. The elements are that—

1. the defendant did not reasonably believe [name] was using or attempting to use unlawful force against [name of third person]; or
2. under the circumstances as the defendant reasonably believed them to be, [name of third person] would not have been entitled to defend himself against this unlawful force; or
3. the defendant did not reasonably believe that his intervention was immediately necessary to protect [name of third person] from the unlawful force.

You must all agree that the state has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, either element 1, 2, or 3 listed above. You need not agree on which of these elements the state has proved.

If you find that the state has failed to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, either element 1, 2, or 3 listed above, you must find the defendant “not guilty.”

If you all agree the state has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the elements of the offense of [insert specific offense], and you all agree the state has proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, either element 1, 2, or 3 listed above, you must find the defendant “guilty.”

[Insert any other instructions raised by the evidence. Then continue with the verdict form found in CPJC 2.1, the general charge.]