ID · jury_instructions
ICJI 555
Theft - Different Forms Possible
ICJI 555 THEFT-DIFFERENT FORMS POSSIBLE
There are different forms of Theft, depending upon the manner in which the theft was committed. The defendant [name] is charged [in Count] with the theft of [description of property]. The state alleges that such theft was committed either by [type of theft] or by [type of theft]. If you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt and unanimously agree that the defendant committed the crime of Theft, you should find the defendant guilty. You are not required to agree as to which particular form of theft the defendant committed.
Comment
I.C. � 18-2401.
See Schad v. Arizona, 501 U.S. 624, 111 S.Ct. 2491, 115 L.Ed.2d 555 (1991). In that case, the defendant was found guilty of first degree murder, committed either as a premeditated homicide or as a homicide during the commission of a felony (robbery). The Court held that the jury need not agree on a single theory of guilt in order to convict the defendant.
Provenance
- Source
- isc.idaho.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-21
- Edition
- 2026-08-20
- Content hash
fd9663c7e831ea61aad5342ac95d93062ecca711b6789dc4e8d3bc8112d84973
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.