Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 9.1-1

Note: This instruction is for simple larceny, as defined in § 53a-119. Other means of

committing larceny are defined in § 53a-119 (1) through (18). See subsequent instructions

in this section for the specific type of larceny charged.

Note: The degree of the larceny is determined by the value of the property stolen. See §

53a-122 (first degree); § 53a-123 (second degree); § 53a-124 (third degree); § 53a-125

(fourth degree); § 53a-125a (fifth degree); § 53a-125b (sixth degree). The dollar amounts

for the degrees of larceny were increased as of October 1, 2009. See the table in

Introduction to Larceny for the values in effect prior to that date.

The defendant is charged [in count__] with larceny in the (first / second / third / fourth / fifth /

sixth) degree. The statute defining this offense reads in pertinent part as follows:

a person commits larceny when, with intent to <insert as appropriate:>

• deprive another of property,

• appropriate property to (himself/herself) or a third person,

(he/she) wrongfully (takes / obtains / withholds) such property from an owner.

Larceny simply means theft or stealing. In this case, the property allegedly stolen is <identify

property>.

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

beyond a reasonable doubt:

Element 1 - Theft of property

The first element is that the defendant wrongfully (took / obtained / withheld) property from the

owner. “Wrongfully” means that the defendant had no legal justification or excuse for (taking /

obtaining / withholding) the property. <Insert appropriate definitions:>

• “Taking” means seizing an article from the possession or control of the person entitled to

it whether by force or some other unlawful means.

• “Obtaining” includes, but is not limited to, bringing about the transfer or purported

transfer of property or of a legal interest in the property from the owner to the defendant

or to a third person.

• “Withholding” means wrongfully keeping property from its owner.

• “Property” includes any (money / personal property / real property / thing in action /

evidence of debt or contract / article of value of any kind). [Commodities of a public

utility, such as gas, electricity, steam and water also constitute property.]

• “Service” includes (labor / professional service / public utility and transportation service /

the supplying of hotel accommodations / restaurant services / entertainment / the

supplying of equipment for use).

“Owner” means not only the true or lawful owner, but any person who has a superior right to that

of the defendant. <Insert as appropriate:>

• This would include persons who have possession or custody of property with the

permission or authority of the true owner, such as repair persons and employees.

• It would include someone who has wrongful possession of property, from whom that

property is later stolen. In other words, a person can be guilty of larceny even when

(he/she) has stolen from a thief.

• A joint owner or a common owner of property would not be guilty of larceny of that

property if (he/she) took it from the other owner.4

• A creditor who has a security interest in the property, even with legal title, cannot take

the property from the lawful possession of another unless (he/she) has a specific

agreement to that effect. A creditor who wrongfully takes such property may be found

guilty of larceny if the other elements of larceny are proved.5

Element 2 - Larcenous Intent

The second element is that at the time the defendant (took / obtained / withheld) the property,

(he/she) intended to <insert as appropriate:>

• permanently deprive the owner of (his/her) property. To intend to “deprive” another of

property means to intend to withhold or keep or cause it to be withheld from another

permanently, or for so long a period or under such circumstances that the major portion

of its value is lost to that person. In other words, the state must prove beyond a

reasonable doubt that the defendant took the property for the purpose of keeping or using

it permanently or virtually permanently, or of disposing of the property in such a way that

there was a permanent or virtually permanent loss of the property to the owner.

• permanently appropriate the property to (himself/herself) or to a third person. To intend

to “appropriate” property of another to oneself or a third person means to intend either to

exercise control over the property, or to aid a third person to exercise control over it,

permanently, or for so long a period or under such circumstances as to acquire the major

portion of its economic value or benefit, or to dispose of the property for the benefit of

oneself or a third person.

A person acts “intentionally” with respect to a result when (his/her) conscious objective is to

cause such result. <See Intent: Specific, Instruction 2.3-1.>

Element 3 - Value of property or services

The third element is that the property had a value that <insert as appropriate:>

First degree: exceeded $20,000.

Second degree: exceeded $10,000.

Third degree: exceeded $2,000.

Fourth degree: exceeded $1,000.

Fifth degree: exceeded $500.

Sixth degree: did not exceed $500.

[<If there are multiple items and their values can be aggregated:> In making this determination,

you may add or aggregate the value of the property involved. You can only aggregate amounts if

the thefts were committed pursuant to one scheme or course of conduct, whether from the same

or several persons.]

“Value” means the market value of the property or service at the time and place of the crime.

“Market value” means the price that would, in all probability, result from fair negotiations

between willing buyers and sellers at the time and place of the crime. In this case, evidence has

been presented that the items claimed to have been stolen have a retail price of $<insert value>.

You are not to consider the value of the property to the owner. You are not to consider that the

defendant did not realize the value of what was stolen or that (he/she) intended to steal

something of lesser value. If you can determine the price the property sold for at the time of the

crime, then that is the controlling value. If the market value cannot be determined, then you

should consider the replacement cost of the property within a reasonable time after the crime.

[<If the property includes written instruments:> When evaluating written instruments, whether

or not they have been issued or delivered, use the value printed on the instruments when such is

obvious, as on some public and corporate bonds and securities. For written instruments that are

evidence of a debt owed, such as checks, drafts or promissory notes, you should use the amount

due or collectable. This amount is ordinarily the face amount of the debt less any part that has

been paid. To evaluate a written instrument that creates or releases or discharges or otherwise

affects any valuable right or privilege or obligation, you must determine the greatest amount of

economic loss that the owner of the written instrument might reasonably suffer by the loss of that

instrument.]

When you cannot determine that the state has proved the value of the property beyond a

reasonable doubt, you must set the value at less than fifty dollars.

Conclusion

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

(took / obtained / withheld) property from the owner, 2) (he/she) did so with the intent to

(permanently deprive the owner of (his/her) property / permanently appropriate the property to

(himself/herself) or a third person), and 3) the property had a value of <insert value according to

degree charged>.

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

of the crime of larceny in the (first / second / third / fourth / fifth / sixth) degree, 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.

1 “Taking” is not defined in the Penal Code. The ordinary usage of “criminal taking” is “the act

of seizing an article, with or without removing it, but with an implicit transfer of possession or

control.” State v. Toro, 62 Conn. App. 635, 642, cert. denied, 256 Conn. 923 (2001).

2 “Withholding” is not defined in the Penal Code. In interpreting the term, the Supreme Court

has cited the following dictionary definitions of “withhold”: (1) “to hold back,” “keep from

action,” “check” or “restrain . . . .” (Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (2002), p.

2627); and (2) “[t]o refrain from giving, granting, or permitting.” (American Heritage College

Dictionary (4th Ed. 2007), p. 1574). State v. Brown, 345 Conn. 354, 381 (2022).

3 See General Statutes § 53a-118 (b).

4 See General Statutes § 53a-118 (c).

5 See General Statutes § 53a-118 (d).

6 The court should only instruct on the part of the statute charged, to deprive or to appropriate,

and should define those terms as they are defined in the statute. State v. Spillane, 54 Conn. App.

201, 210-20 (1999), aff’d on other grounds, 257 Conn. 750 (2001).

7 See General Statutes § 53a-121.