From the Miami Herald:

[onenote]

75. What you read is wrong.

In some states, such as Ohio, the accused has the burden both of producing evidence to support a claim of self defense and the burden of proving the truthfulness of that claim by preponderance of the evidence.

But in other states, such as Florida, the only burden on the defense is a very minimal burden of providing evidence that, if true, would support a self defense claim. The burden of rebutting the claim, beyond a reasonable doubt, falls on the state.

Here is the language that the judge used (based on the Florida standard jury instructions and statute) with respect to this issue:

If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find George Zimmerman not guilty.

However, if from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find him guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved.