Bindinglaw

CT · jury_instructions

Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 10.2-9

Payment Card Forgery -- § 53a-128c (g)

activein force · 2019-05-02 – presentas-observed

The defendant is charged [in count__] with payment card forgery. The statute defining this

offense imposes punishment on

any person other than the cardholder or any person authorized by (him/her) who, with

intent to defraud the issuer, a participating party, or a person providing money, goods,

services or anything else of value, or any other person, signs a payment card.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements

beyond a reasonable doubt:

Element 1 - Signed payment card

The first element is that the defendant signed a payment card, and was not the cardholder or

anyone authorized by the cardholder. “Payment card” means either a credit card or a debit card.

“Credit card” means any instrument or device, whether known as a credit card, as a credit plate,

or by any other name, issued with or without fee by an issuer for the use of a cardholder in

obtaining money, goods, services or anything else of value on credit. “Debit card” means any

card, code, device or other means of access, or any combination thereof, that is issued or

authorized for use to debit an asset account held directly or indirectly by a financial institution

and that may be used by the cardholder to obtain money, goods, services or anything else of

value.

Element 2 - Intent to defraud

The second element is that the defendant intended to defraud the issuer, a participating party, or a

person providing money, goods, services or anything else of value, or any other person. <See

Intent to Defraud, Instruction 2.3-6.>

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant 1) signed a

payment card, and 2) intended to defraud a purported issuer, a participating party, or a person

providing money, goods, services, or anything else of value, or any other person.

If you unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements

of the crime of payment card forgery, then you shall find the defendant guilty. On the other

hand, if you unanimously find that the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of

the elements, you shall then find the defendant not guilty.

Provenance

Source
jud.ct.gov
Retrieved
2026-08-23
Edition
2026-08-23
Content hash
f1de9860355434330398302e21fbb159f3707c915d5fb480d5e9638a77e578d3
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.
Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 10.2-9 — Payment Card Forgery… · binding.law