Conn. Crim. Jury Instr. 9.3-3

The defendant is charged [in count__] with arson in the second degree. The statute defining this

offense reads in pertinent part as follows:

a person is guilty of arson in the second degree when, with intent to destroy or

damage a building, a fire or explosion was caused by an individual hired by such

person to start such fire or cause such explosion.

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

beyond a reasonable doubt:

Element 1 - Intent

The first element is that the defendant specifically intended to destroy or damage a building.

1 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.>

Ordinarily, “building” implies a structure that may be entered and used by people, as a residence

or for business, or for other purposes involving occupancy by people, whether or not it is actually

entered and used as such. <Insert one or both of the following parts of the definition as

appropriate:>

• The law has expanded this definition to include, in addition to what we ordinarily know

as a building, any watercraft, aircraft, trailer, sleeping car, railroad car, other structure or

vehicle or any building with a valid certificate of occupancy.

• The statutory definition also provides that where a building consists of separate units,

such as, but not limited to separate apartments, offices or rented rooms, any unit not

occupied by the defendant is, in addition to being a part of such building, a separate

building.

Element 2 - Hired another person

The second element is that the defendant hired another person to carry out that intent. The state

alleges that the defendant hired <insert name of other person>.

Element 3 - Started or caused fire or explosion

The third element is that <insert name of other person> started a fire or caused an explosion. To

“start” means to commence. To “cause an act to be done” is to bring it about. The fire started

need not be a tremendous one. The mere striking of a match can be the start of a fire. The fire or

explosion must be incendiary in origin. That is, it must not be accidental or caused by

carelessness. In considering whether the fire or explosion was incendiary in origin, you may rely

upon all the facts and circumstances at the time and place of the fire or explosion, as you find

them to have been proved, and may draw any reasonable or logical inferences from such facts.

The mere fact that there was fire or explosion damage to a building does not create an inference

that its origin was incendiary.

Conclusion

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

destroy or damage <identify the building>, 2) the defendant hired <insert name of other person>,

and 3) <insert name of other person> started the fire or caused the explosion.

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

of the crime of arson in the second 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 State v. Dubose, 75 Conn. App. 163, 174-75, cert. denied, 263 Conn. 909 (2003).

2 State v. Houle, 105 Conn. App. 813, 818 n.4 (2008) (on the meaning of incendiary); State v.

Gaines, 36 Conn. App. 454, 458-59 (1995) (on the meaning of “causing a fire”).