Circuit split · criminal procedure
Whether a jury instruction that mandates the jury find an element the defendant has stipulated to is impermissible
1 federal appellate case on this question, each acknowledging the disagreement in its own words.
- United States v. Ayoub498 F3D 532
Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals · August 16, 2007
“First, we noted that there is a split of authority regarding whether instructions that mandate that a jury find a stipulated element are impermissible, but declined to decide that question and simply assumed that the instruction was erroneous.” — Split of authority
Empirical analysis of this case →
The other side of the split
Decisions the acknowledging court(s) named as the opposing or joined side, quoted in the acknowledging opinion's own words.
- Declined to followJessie Jones108 F.3d 669
“Our decision in Jessie Jones fo *545 cused on the second of these rights — that a jury find these elements beyond reasonable doubt — but, in doing so, we indicated where we fall on the first.” — United States v. Ayoub, acknowledging the split
- Discussed · Fifth CircuitBranch
“The concurrence cited two cases for this proposition, including the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Branch.” — United States v. Ayoub, acknowledging the split
- Discussed · 4th Cir.United States v. Muse83 F.3d 672
What the split turns on
- Anchor precedents:
- United States v. Martin Linen Supply Co.430 U.S. 564
- Doctrines & tests:
- plain-error review ·
- rule prohibiting a directed verdict for the prosecution
- Constitutional provisions:
- Sixth Amendment
Cases are grouped by the legal question they announce a split on, classified from the court's own acknowledgment sentence. Verified acknowledgments only. Counter-side decisions are extracted from the acknowledging opinions' own text and linked only when the citation resolves in this corpus. See all circuit splits.