IL · jury_instructions
Ill. Pattern Jury Instr. (Criminal) 13.44
Issues In Retail Theft By Taking Possession--Value Of $150 Or Less--Value Exceeding
$150
To sustain the charge of retail theft, the State must prove the following propositions:
First Proposition: That ____ was a merchant; and
Second Proposition: That the merchandise was [(displayed) (held) (stored) (offered)] for
sale in a retail mercantile establishment; and
Third Proposition: That the defendant knowingly [(took possession of the merchandise)
(carried away the merchandise) (transferred the merchandise) (caused the merchandise to be
carried away) (caused the merchandise to be transferred)]; and
Fourth Proposition: That when he did so, the defendant intended to deprive the merchant
permanently of the [(possession of) (use of) (benefit of)] the merchandise without paying the
full retail value of the merchandise[; and
Fifth Proposition: That the full retail value of the merchandise exceeded $150].
[or]
Fourth Proposition: That the defendant intended to retain the merchandise[; and
Fifth Proposition: That the full retail value of the merchandise exceeded $150].
If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that each one of these propositions
has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant guilty.
If you find from your consideration of all the evidence that any one of these propositions
has not been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, you should find the defendant not guilty.
Provenance
- Source
- illinoiscourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- 2026-08-19
- Content hash
3e038fbb0fff0876e630b99c4ecbfe8f1c1e23830e5c69df0a512276b8bd369d
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.