In cases of euthanasia, determinations of guilt may be influenced by legal and extra-legal factors. This study explores the role that nullification instructions play in juror decision making. A defendant may be viewed as less culpable if the act was done out of mercy and jury nullification may occur as a result. We anticipated that these determinations may be influenced by the manner of death and the relational distance between the defendant and the decedent. It is unknown how euthanasia is viewed when it is performed by a physician compared to a family member or friend. To answer these questions, participants acted as mock jurors in a euthanasia case. The descriptions of the case varied by the presence of nullification instructions, the manner of death, and the defendant's relationship to the decedent. The results revealed significant effects of method of euthanasia and the type of defendant on juror verdicts. Jurors were most likely to acquit in a case that provided nullification instructions and involved a spouse using lethal injection for euthanasia. This finding suggests that different circumstances of a euthanasia case will affect jurors' propensity to focus on personal sympathies and interpretations. Limitations and future directions are discussed.