Del. P.J.I. Crim. No. 11.811(a)(3)

CRIMINAL MISCHIEF [UTILITY]

In order to find Defendant guilty of Criminal Mischief, you must find the

State proved the following two (2) elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

(1) Defendant [tampered/made connection] with the tangible property of

[utility]; and

(2) Defendant acted intentionally or recklessly.

If applicable: [A defense raised by Defendant in this case

is that Defendant had a right to (tamper/make contact) with the tangible property of

the utility. In order to establish this affirmative defense, Defendant must prove, by a

preponderance of the evidence, that Defendant had a lawful purpose to engage in that

conduct.]

“Intentionally” means it was Defendant’s conscious objective or purpose to

[tamper/make connection] with the tangible property of [utility].

“Recklessly” means Defendant was aware of and consciously disregarded a

substantial and unjustifiable risk Defendant was [tampering/making connection] with

the tangible property of [utility]. The State must demonstrate the risk was of such a

nature and degree Defendant’s disregard of the risk was a gross deviation from the

standard of conduct a reasonable person would observe under the same

circumstances.

Proof by a preponderance of the evidence means proof something is more

likely than not. It means certain evidence, when compared to the evidence opposed

to it, has the more convincing force and makes you believe something is more likely

true than not. Preponderance of the evidence does not depend on the number of

witnesses. If the evidence is evenly balanced, then Defendant has not proved the

defense by a preponderance of the evidence, and you must find against Defendant on

that point. The State has no burden to present any evidence on this matter.