The Montana Supreme Court has not yet specified a standard of review for whether a district court properly applied the correct burden of proof. However, in State v. Anderson, 2008 MT 116, ¶ 17, 342 Mont. 485, 182 P.3d 80, the Court explained that jury instructions which shift the burden of proof to the defendant may constitute a violation of due process. State v. Anderson, 2008 MT 116, ¶ 17, 342 Mont. 485, 182 P.3d 80. Because the issue of whether a defendant's due process rights were violated is a question of law, we review the district court's decision in instructing the jury to determine whether its interpretation of the law was correct. Anderson, ¶ 17. See also State v. Raugust, 2000 MT 146, ¶ 12, 300 Mont. 54, 3 P.3d 115 ("The standard of review for jury instructions in a criminal case is whether the instructions, as a whole, fully and fairly instruct the jury on the law applicable to the case.").