NC · jury_instructions
N.C.P.I.—Crim. 259.41
[BANK EXAMINER] [OTHER EMPLOYEE] DISCLOSING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION. MISDEMEANOR.
The defendant has been charged with disclosing confidential
information related to the examination of a bank.
For you to find the defendant guilty of this offense the State must
prove two things beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, that defendant was a [bank examiner] [(describe other
employee)] of the Office of the Commissioner of Banks;
And Second, that the defendant failed to keep secret the facts and
information obtained in the course of an examination of a bank (except
as [permitted] [required]).1
If you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that on or
about the alleged date the defendant was a [bank examiner] [(describe
other employee)] of the Office of the Commissioner of Banks and that the
defendant failed to keep secret the facts and information obtained in the
course of an examination of a bank (except as [permitted] [required]), 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, then it would
be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.
History
N.C.P.I.—Crim. 259.41 (June 2013). N.C. Gen. Stat. § 53C-8-8. 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
686c6e84669b3cb4ec94020bc7590e288d1f4ada9229dba7ecfea477835f857a
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.