N.C.P.I.—Crim. 216.46

NOTE WELL: Use this instruction only when the

indictment alleges that the property was stolen. Use

N.C.P.I.-Crim. 216.49A when the indictment alleges

that the property was embezzled, taken by false

pretenses, taken in a manner constituting larceny by an

employee or taken in any other felonious manner

except larceny. See, S. v. Babb, 34 N.C. App. 336

(1977).

The defendant has been charged with possession of stolen goods,

which is possessing goods which the defendant knew or had reasonable

grounds to believe had been stolen.

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

prove four things beyond a reasonable doubt:

First, that (describe property) was stolen.1 Property is stolen when

it is taken and carried away without the owner's consent by someone who

intends at the time to deprive the owner of its use permanently and

knows that he is not entitled to take it.

Second, that the defendant possessed this property.

NOTE WELL: Where constructive possession is at

issue, or where a fuller definition of actual possession

is desired, incorporate the relevant portions of N.C.P.I.-

Crim. 104.41 at this point.

Third, that the defendant knew or had reasonable grounds to

believe that the property had been stolen.

And Fourth, that the defendant possessed the property with a

dishonest purpose. (Describe purpose, e.g., "Converting it to his own

use") would be a dishonest purpose.

If you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that

(describe property) was stolen, and that on or about the alleged date the

defendant possessed this property and knew or had reasonable grounds

to believe that it was stolen, and that the defendant possessed this

property for a dishonest purpose, it would be your duty to return a verdict

of guilty. If you do not so find, or if you have a reasonable doubt as to

one or more of these things, it would be your duty to return a verdict of

not guilty.