NC · jury_instructions
N.C.P.I.—Crim. 226.62
CYBERSTALKING THROUGH USE OF AN ELECTRONIC TRACKING DEVICE. MISDEMEANOR.
For you to find the defendant guilty of this offense, the State must
prove two things beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, that the defendant had an electronic tracking device under
defendant’s control. An electronic tracking device is an electronic or
mechanical device that permits a person to remotely determine or track
the position and movement of another person.
And Second, that the defendant knowingly [[installed] [placed]
[used] an electronic tracking device]] [[caused an electronic tracking
device to be [installed] [placed] [used]] without the consent of the
victim, (name victim), to track the location of the alleged victim, (name
victim).
If you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that on or
about the alleged date, the defendant knowingly had an electronic
tracking device under defendant’s control, and that the defendant
knowingly [[installed] [placed] [used] an electronic tracking device]]
[[caused an electronic tracking device to be [installed] [placed] [used]]
without consent of the alleged victim to track the location of the alleged
victim, then 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 both of these things,
it would be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.
History
N.C.P.I.—Crim. 226.62 (June 2016). N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-196.3. 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
b598c6055ac4b95fe87a1e9cda084c294aa01fc8fcb4e1a94fb67c28ee0bff79
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.