THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin
Go to Shellow
Collection Table of Contents
Possession Of Stolen Property
1. Possession Of Stolen
Property: Knowledge Element
2. Possession of Recently
Stolen Property: Factors To Consider
3. Second-Hand Dealer:
Defendant Reasonably Believes Property Is Not Stolen
4. Price Paid For
Merchandise: Inference; Jury Must Consider Buyer’s Occupation
THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin
1. Possession Of Stolen Property: Knowledge Element
ALERT: Carefully review the Caveats and Disclaimers before using these materials.
SAMPLE INSTRUCTION # 1:
It is __________’s (name of defendant) theory of this case that the state has not proven that (he/she) knew that the merchandise which (he/she) purchased from __________ (name of third party) was stolen. If the state has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that __________ (name of defendant) had knowledge that [this] [these] _________ (item(s)) were stolen, then the state has not proven its case and, as a matter of law, __________ (name of defendant) must be acquitted.
RELATED SHELLOW MATERIALS:
See also THE SHELLOW COLLECTION: Elements: Knowledge.
RELATED NCJIC MATERIALS:
See NCJIC Chapter 33: Inference From Possession Of Recently Stolen Property.
See NCJIC Chapter 97: Receiving Or Possession Of Stolen Property.
See NCJIC 271.2.3 [Inference From Possession Of Recently Stolen Property: Defense Theories To Challenge Or Limit The Inference].
See NCJIC 305.16.7 [Possession Of Stolen Property].
THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin
2. Possession of Recently Stolen Property: Factors To Consider
ALERT: Carefully review the Caveats and Disclaimers before using these materials.
SAMPLE INSTRUCTION:
In applying the rule respecting the possession of recently stolen property, the length of possession along with all the other facts and circumstances must be considered, as the type and kind of property, the amount of volume thereof, the ease or difficulty with which it may be assimilated into legitimate trade channels, including the circumstances under which the property is alleged to have been acquired.
AUTHORITY:
United States v. Prujansky, 415 F.2d 1045, 1051 (6th Cir. 1969).
RELATED NCJIC MATERIALS:
See NCJIC Chapter 33: Inference From Possession Of Recently Stolen Property.
See NCJIC Chapter 97: Receiving Or Possession Of Stolen Property.
See NCJIC 271.2.3 [Inference From Possession Of Recently Stolen Property: Defense Theories To Challenge Or Limit The Inference].
See NCJIC 305.16.7 [Possession Of Stolen Property].
THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin
3. Second-Hand Dealer: Defendant Reasonably Believes Property Is Not Stolen
ALERT: Carefully review the Caveats and Disclaimers before using these materials.
SAMPLE INSTRUCTION:
It is __________’s (name of defendant) position in this case that, by complying with the requirements of (his/her) second-hand dealer's license and (his/her) precious metal and gem dealer's license, by holding the property purchased from __________ (name of third party) for such inspection periods as the ordinances require, and by not receiving information from the police that the items (he/she) had purchased from __________ (name of third party) were stolen, __________ (name of defendant) reasonably believed that the property in fact was not stolen.
If, after considering all the evidence in this case, including such evidence as you find to support __________’s (name of defendant) position, you are left with a reasonable doubt as to his guilt, you must acquit (him/her).
RELATED NCJIC MATERIALS:
See NCJIC Chapter 33: Inference From Possession Of Recently Stolen Property.
See NCJIC Chapter 97: Receiving Or Possession Of Stolen Property.
See NCJIC 271.2.3 [Inference From Possession Of Recently Stolen Property: Defense Theories To Challenge Or Limit The Inference].
See NCJIC 305.16.7 [Possession Of Stolen Property].
THE SHELLOW COLLECTION
Jury Instructions By James M. Shellow of Wisconsin
4. Price Paid For Merchandise: Inference; Jury Must Consider Buyer’s Occupation
ALERT: Carefully review the Caveats and Disclaimers before using these materials.
SAMPLE INSTRUCTION # 1:
In considering whether the fact that __________ (name of defendant) paid $________ (lesser amount) for ________ (merchandise, e.g., jewelry) which had an appraised value of $ __________ (higher amount) is evidence that (he/she) had knowledge that the ________ (merchandise, e.g., jewelry) was stolen, you may consider the nature of the business in which __________ (name of defendant) was engaged and the prices paid by others in such a business in relation to the appraised value of the merchandise.
SAMPLE INSTRUCTION # 2:
In considering whether the price paid by __________ (name of defendant) for the merchandise which (he/she) purchased from __________ (name of third party) permits the inference that __________ (name of defendant) knew the goods were stolen, you may consider the prices customarily paid by persons in __________’s (name of defendant) business for similar merchandise with comparable appraisal values.
RELATED NCJIC MATERIALS:
See NCJIC Chapter 33: Inference From Possession Of Recently Stolen Property.
See NCJIC Chapter 97: Receiving Or Possession Of Stolen Property.
See NCJIC 271.2.3 [Inference From Possession Of Recently Stolen Property: Defense Theories To Challenge Or Limit The Inference].
See NCJIC 305.16.7 [Possession Of Stolen Property].