House rejects optional 'manifestly unjust' jury instruction, 39‑30

House Bill 284, which would have allowed judges to include an optional jury instruction telling jurors they may find a defendant not guilty when applying the law would produce a result 'manifestly unjust,' failed on the House floor by a vote of 39 no to 30 yes.

Representative Roberts introduced the bill as a limited, high‑standard tool that judges could choose to include among routine jury instructions. “This bill would allow judges to include in their instructions to the jury that the jury can find the defendant not guilty on a specific charge when the guilty verdict would otherwise be manifestly unjust,” the sponsor said.

Opponents argued the change risks blurring the judge‑jury roles and could undermine predictability in the justice system. Representative Seggers warned the change could lead to “runaway juries” and unpredictability; other critics emphasized that jury instructions and consistent application of law undergird the rule of law.

Supporters said the instruction would be rare and gated by judge review, arguing it provides a narrow remedy where the strict application of law shocks the conscience. Representative Miles said the provision would be applied so rarely that it would not threaten predictability. After debate and questions about whether other states employ similar language, the House voted the bill down 39‑30. The clerk recorded the result and the bill will be referred to staff for further processing per House rules.