People v. Downs

(Court opinion corrected 7/2/14.) Jury in first-degree murder trial asked, "What is your definition of reasonable doubt, 80%, 70%, 60%?". Court answered, "We cannot give you a definition it is your duty to define." Jury then asked if it could have transcripts of three witnesses' testimony, court responded yes but that it would take several hours to prepare. Jury then delivered guilty verdict before transcripts ready. The term "reasonable doubt" is self-defining and does not need any further defining in court instructions. Jury's questions and timing of verdict indicate substantial likelihood that jury convicted Defendant by standard of less than reasonable doubt, and thus court's response was erroneous definition of "reasonable doubt" and was plain error, and evidence was closely balanced.(HUTCHINSON and SPENCE, concurring.)