III.B-C. Consideration of this information by the court did not violate'petitioner’s due process rights. See supra Part V.B.2.b. Petitioner’s claim that his sentence was excessive or improper is dismissed. VIII. Insufficient Jury Instructions A. Law “A jury instruction is improper where it creates a presumption that relieves the prosecution of its burden. to prove the elements [of a crime] beyond a reasonable doubt.” Sullivan v. Louisiana, 508 U.S. 275, 280, 113 S.Ct. 2078, 124 L.Ed.2d 182 (1993). The Supreme Court has recognized the existence of “an especially heavy burden on a defendant who ... seeks to show constitutional error from a jury instruction that quotes a state statute.” Waddington v. Sarausad, 555 U.S. 179, 191, 129 S.Ct. 823, 172 L.Ed.2d 532 (2009) (citations omitted) (<HOLDING>). “[E]ven if there is some ambiguity,
holding that the court was not bound by the parties agreement that contracts were unambiguous and holding that contracts were ambiguous holding the state law claims were not preempted holding that even though new jersey supreme court found that state antidiscrimination law did not entitle party to jury trial in state court jury trial was still provided as matter of right in federal court holding that district courts do not have appellate jurisdiction over state courts holding state courts jury instructions which quoted accompliceliability statute were not ambiguous and even assuming ambiguity state appellate court was reasonable in finding instructions were proper