Bindinglaw

NC · jury_instructions

N.C.P.I.—Crim. 226.46

BIGAMOUS COHABITATION. FELONY.

activein force · 2003-04-01 – presentas-observed

The defendant has been charged with bigamous cohabitation.

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

prove four things beyond a reasonable doubt:

First, that the defendant was married to (name first spouse) on (name

date) in North Carolina.

Second, that thereafter on (name date), while still married to (name

first spouse), 2 he married (name second spouse) in (name other State).

Third, that (name first spouse) was alive at the time he married (name

second spouse).

And Fourth, that after the defendant married (name second spouse),

they cohabited in North Carolina; that is, lived together as husband and

wife.

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

(name date), the defendant married (name first spouse) in North Carolina

and that thereafter, on (name date), while still married to (name first

spouse) and while (name first spouse) was alive, he married (name second

spouse) in (name other State) and thereafter cohabited with (name second

spouse) in North Carolina, 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.

1. See State v. Jones, 277 N.C. 94, 40 S. E.2d 700 (1946).

2. G.S. 14-183 provides: “Nothing contained in this section shall extend to any

person marrying a second time, whose husband or wife shall have been continually absent

from such person for the space of seven years then last past, and shall not have been

known by such person to have been living within that time; nor to any person who at the

time was of such second marriage shall have been lawfully divorced from the bond of the

first marriage; nor to any person whose former marriage shall have been declared void by

the sentence of any court of competent jurisdiction.” If the jurisdiction of the court

purporting to grant the divorce or annulment is in issue, see State v. Williams, 224 N.C. 183

(1944).

History

N.C.P.I.—Crim. 226.46 (Replacement April 2003). N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-183. 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
2026-09-25
Edition
2026-09-24
Content hash
3a74f6e339e2d631dae5d2c8f191e20924482b771fe6fa57d418c3de0875920d
View the official source →

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.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.