N.C.P.I.—Crim. 270.20

NOTE WELL: This instruction is to be used for offenses occurring

between October 1, 1993 and November 30, 2006. For offenses

occurring on or after December 1, 2006, use N.C.P.I.—Crim.

270.20A. This instruction is also to be used when the defendant

is charged with habitual impaired driving and admits previous

conviction(s) under G.S. 20-138.1 (or an equivalent statute from

another jurisdiction). See G.S. 15A-928.

The defendant has been charged with impaired driving.

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

prove three things beyond a reasonable doubt:

First, that the defendant was driving 1 a vehicle. 2

Second, that the defendant was driving that vehicle upon a [highway]

[street] [public vehicular area] within the state. 3

And Third, that at the time the defendant was driving that vehicle, the

defendant:

NOTE WELL: If the evidence supports submission of the case

under alternatives (A) and (B) instructions on both alternatives

should be given.

(A) [was under the influence of an impairing substance. (Name

substance involved) is an impairing substance. 4 The defendant is

under the influence of an impairing substance when the

defendant has taken (or consumed) a sufficient quantity of that

impairing substance to cause the defendant to lose the normal

control of the defendant’s bodily or mental faculties, or both, to

such an extent that there is an appreciable impairment of either

or both of these faculties. 5]

(B) [had consumed sufficient alcohol that at any relevant time after

driving the defendant had an alcohol concentration 6 of 0.08 or

more grams of alcohol [per 210 liters of breath] [per 100

milliliters of blood]. A relevant time is any time after driving that

the driver still has in the driver’s body alcohol consumed before

or during driving]. 7 8

(Evidence in this case tends to show that a chemical test known as

a(n) [intoxilizer] [blood test] was offered to the defendant by a law

enforcement officer and that the defendant refused to take the test. You

may consider this evidence together with all other evidence in determining

whether the defendant was under the influence of an impairing substance at

the time he drove a motor vehicle.)

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

about the alleged date, the defendant drove a vehicle on a [highway]

[street] [public vehicular area] in this state and that when the defendant did

so the defendant [was under the influence of an impairing substance] [had

consumed sufficient alcohol that at any relevant time after driving the

defendant had an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more], 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.