TEXT  OF THE FULLY INFORMED  JURY AMENDMENT



Section 36.  Fully informed juries. (1) It is 
the  natural right of every citizen  of  this 
state, when serving on a criminal trial jury, 
to   judge  both  the  law  and   the   facts 
pertaining  to the case before that jury,  in 
order  to determine whether justice  will  be 
served by applying the law to the  defendant.  
It  is mandatory that all jurors be  informed 
of this right.



(2)  Before the jury hears a case, and  again 
before  jury deliberation begins,  the  court 
shall  inform the jurors of their  rights  in 
these   words:    "As  jurors,   your   first 
responsibility  is  to  decide  whether   the 
defendant  has broken the law. If you  decide 
that  he  has, but that you  cannot  in  good 
conscience support a guilty verdict, you  are 
not  required to do so.  To reach  a  verdict 
which  you believe is just, each of  you  has 
the  right  to consider to  what  extent  the 
defendant's actions have actually caused harm 
or otherwise violated your sense of right and 
wrong.   If you believe justice requires  it, 
you may also judge both the merits of the law 
under  which  he  has been  charged  and  the 
wisdom of applying that law to the defendant.  
Accordingly,  for  each  charge  against  the 
defendant,  even  if review of  the  evidence 
strictly in terms of the law would indicate a 
guilty  verdict, you have the right  to  find 
him  innocent.  The court cautions that  with 
the  exercise of this right comes full  moral 
responsibility for the verdict you bring in."



(3)  As part of their oath, the jurors  shall 
affirm  that they understand the  information 
concerning  their rights which  this  section 
requires the court to give them, and no party 
to   the   trial  may   be   prevented   from 
encouraging  jurors to exercise  this  right.  
For the jurors to be so informed is  declared 
to  be  part of the  defendant's  fundamental 
right  to  trial  by  jury,  and  failure  to 
conduct any criminal trial in accordance with 
this  section shall not  constitute  harmless 
error, and shall be grounds for mistrial.  No 
potential  juror  may  be  disqualified  from 
serving  on  a  jury  because  he   expresses 
willingness   to   judge  the  law   or   its 
application,   or   to  vote   according   to 
conscience.



     MOST  STATES HAVE ADOPTED  FIJA  WORDING 
THE  SAME  AS OR VERY SIMILAR  TO  THE  MODEL 
WORDING.  California and Nevada have  wording 
which is quite different, but the  functional 
sense  is the same. California FIJA  includes 
civil law as well as criminal law.