N.C.P.I.—Crim. 219B.44

NOTE WELL: This statute is directed primarily at

merchants dealing with credit card transactions.

The defendant has been charged with felonious credit card fraud.

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

prove four things beyond a reasonable doubt:

First, that the credit card issuer authorized the defendant, upon

presentation of a credit card by the cardholder, to furnish [money] [credit]

[goods] [services] [something of value].

Second, that the defendant represented in writing to the issuer that

he had provided something of value to the cardholder(s) which he had not

provided.

Third, that the defendant intended to defraud the [issuer]

[cardholder].

And Fourth, that (during a six-month period) the difference in value

between what the defendant actually furnished to the cardholder and

what he represented in writing to the issuer of the card to have been

furnished to the cardholder was greater than $500.

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

about the alleged date] [between the alleged dates], the defendant,

upon presentation of a credit card, was authorized by the credit card

issuer to furnish [money] [credit] [goods] [services] [something of value]

and with the intent to defraud the [issuer] [cardholder], the defendant

represented in writing to the issuer that the defendant had furnished

something of value to the cardholder(s) which he had not furnished, and

that (during this period) the difference in value between what the

defendant actually furnished to the cardholder(s) and what he

represented in writing to the issuer of the card to have been furnished to

the cardholder was greater than $500, it would be your duty to return a

verdict of guilty of felonious credit card fraud. However, if you do not so

find or have a reasonable doubt as to one or more of these things, you

will not return a verdict of guilty of felonious credit card fraud2 but must

determine whether the defendant is guilty of non-felonious credit card

fraud. Non-felonious credit card fraud differs from felonious credit card

fraud in that the State need not prove that (during a six-month period)

the difference in value between what the defendant actually furnished to

the cardholder(s) and what he represented in writing to the issuer of the

card to have been furnished to the cardholder was greater than $500.

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

about the alleged date] [between the alleged dates], the defendant,

upon presentation of a credit card, was authorized by the credit card

issuer to furnish [money] [credit] [goods] [services] [something of value]

and with the intent to defraud the [issuer] [cardholder], the defendant

represented in writing to the issuer that the defendant had furnished

something of value to the cardholder(s) which he had not furnished, it

would be your duty to return a verdict of guilty of non-felonious credit

card fraud. 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.