NC · jury_instructions
N.C.P.I.—Crim. 216.59
ORGANIZED RETAIL THEFT–ACTING AS LEADER. FELONY.
For you to find the defendant guilty of this offense, the State must
prove two things beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, that the defendant conspired with two or more persons
(names of other persons) as an [organizer] [supervisor] [financier]
[leader] [manager]. A conspiracy as applied in this case would be an
agreement between three or more people to do an unlawful act or to do a
lawful act in an unlawful manner.2
Second, that the defendant intended to engage for profit in a
[scheme] [course of conduct] to effectuate the [transfer] [sale] of
property3 stolen from a merchant.4
If you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that on or
about the alleged date the defendant conspired with two or more persons
as an [organizer] [supervisor] [financier] [leader] [manager], intending to
engage for profit in a [scheme] [course of conduct] to effectuate the
[transfer] [sale] of property stolen from a merchant, 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.
History
N.C.P.I.—Crim. 216.59 (June 2018). N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-86.6(a1)(2). Prepared by the North Carolina Conference of Superior Court Judges' Committee on Pattern Jury Instructions, assisted by the UNC School of Government; published by the School of Government.
Provenance
- Source
- sog.unc.edu
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-24
- Edition
- 2026-09-24
- Content hash
83d3ed67d288454e07e8bf2e3cf6d23290475cbf8372efaf40e1d94514290e18
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.