instructions, rearranging the order of a few sentences and paragraphs concerning how to consider lesser included offenses. 11 . This burden is reflected in the uniform instructions on defenses. See OUJI-CR2d 8-5 (burden of proof for defense of another); OUJI-CR2d 8-17 (burden of proof for defense of property); OUJI-CR2d 8-22 (burden of proof for duress); OUJI-CR2d 8-26 (burden of proof for entrapment); OUJI-CR2d 8-30 (burden of proof for excusable homicide); OUJI-CR2d 8-33 (burden of proof for insanity); OUJI-CR2d 8-38 (burden of proof for voluntary intoxication); OUJI-CR2d 8-44 (burden of proof for involuntary intoxication); and OUJI-CR2d 8-49 (burden of proof for self-defense). 12 . These instructions satisfy In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 364, 90 S.Ct. 1068, 1073, 25 L.Ed.2d 368 (1970)(<HOLDING>). Cf. Patterson, 432 U.S. at 214-16, 97 S.Ct.
holding that no person shall suffer the onus of a criminal conviction except upon sufficient proof  defined as evidence necessary to convince a trier of fact beyond a reasonable doubt of the existence of every element of the offense holding that conviction of a crime requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime holding under the due process clause of the fifth amendment and the notice and jury trial guarantees of the sixth amendment any fact other than prior conviction that increases the maximum penalty for a crime must be charged in an indictment submitted to a jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt holding that the due process clause protects the accused against conviction except upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime charged holding state must prove every element of an offense beyond a reasonable doubt and a scheme that shifts the burden of proof to the defendant by presuming a fact upon proof of the other elements of the offense violates due process