N.C.P.I.—Crim. 210.60

The defendant has been charged with child abduction.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this offense the State must

prove three things beyond a reasonable doubt.

First, that the victim was a minor child who was at least four years

younger than the defendant. A minor child is one who has not reached

the age of 18 years.1

Second, that the minor child was in the custody, placement, or care

of a person, agency, or institution lawfully entitled to the child's custody.

And Third, that the defendant, without legal justification or

defense, [abducted the minor child from] [induced the minor child to

leave] the person, agency or institution lawfully entitled to the child's

custody. [To abduct means to take and carry a child away from one place

to another place by force, violence, threat, intimidation, or fraud.2] [To

induce means to persuade or entice without using force, violence, threat,

intimidation, or fraud. (If the defendant persuaded or enticed the minor

child to leave the person, agency or institution lawfully entitled to the

minor child's custody, the minor child’s consent or agreement to go is no

defense. If, however, the minor child on his own decided to leave the

person, agency or institution lawfully entitled to the minor child's custody

and the defendant did nothing to persuade or entice the child to do so,

there would be no inducement and the defendant would be not guilty.)3]

If you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that on or

about the alleged date the victim was a minor child who was at least four

years younger than the defendant and that the defendant, without legal

justification or defense, [abducted the minor child from] [induced the

minor child to leave] the person, agency, or institution lawfully entitled to

the minor child's custody, it would be your duty to return a verdict of

guilty. If you do not so find or have a reasonable doubt as to one or more

of these things, it would be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.

NOTE WELL: If the defendant contends that the

defendant made a mistake of identity, incorporate the

following additional instruction and mandate.4

(The defendant contends that the defendant made a mistake of

identity; that is, that the defendant took the child mistaking the child for

(name other child). If the defendant in good faith and with due care took

the victim by mistake, the defendant’s act is excused and the defendant

would not be guilty. In determining whether the defendant made a

mistake of identity in good faith and with due care, you should consider

all of the facts and circumstances existing at the time as you find them

from the evidence.)

NOTE WELL: If the defendant contends that he had or

thought he had the consent of some person to take the

child, incorporate the following additional instruction

and mandate.

(The defendant contends that (name person) gave consent to the

defendant to take the minor child. If the defendant had the consent of

(name person), or reasonably believed that such consent had been given,

the defendant’s act is excused, and the defendant would not be guilty.

In determining whether the defendant had the consent of (name person)

or reasonably believed that such consent had been given, you should

consider all of the facts and circumstances existing at the time.)