N.J. Model Criminal Jury Charge, N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1

Revised 7/2/09

ROBBERY IN THE SECOND DEGREE

(N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1)

The defendant is charged with the crime of robbery. The indictment reads in pertinent

part as follows:

(Read Indictment)

The part of the statute on which this indictment is based reads as follows:

A person is guilty of robbery if, in the course of committing a theft, he (select

appropriate):

(1) knowingly 1 inflicts bodily injury or uses force2 upon another;

or

(2) threatens another with or purposely puts him in fear of immediate bodily

injury;

or

(3) commits or threatens immediately to commit any crime of the first or

second degree.

In order for you to find the defendant guilty of robbery, the State is required to prove

each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. that the defendant was in the course of committing a theft

3,

2. that while in the course of committing that theft the defendant (Choose from the

following three):

a. knowingly inflicted bodily inju ry or used force upon another.4

1 In State v. Sewell, 127 N.J. 133 (1992), the Supreme Court held that the State must prove "knowledge" as

the requisite mental state for the injury/force element of robbery.

2 Note: If the crime occurred before Februa ry 6, 1981, the jury should not be instructed on the use of force

element. See L. 1981, c.22, § 1 adding “use of force” to (a)(1).

3 As a result of the statutory consolidation of all theft crimes, the Supreme Court has recognized that,

depending upon the circumstances, a trial judge may need to charge the jury with a lesser related theft crime that

would not necessarily be a lesser included offense to robbery because of additional elements that may be required to

prove the lesser offense. State v. Smith , 136 N.J. 245, 250-51 (1994); see also State v. Talley , 94 N.J. 385, 393

(1983); State v. Thomas , 187 N.J. 119, 129-136 (2006), (Explaining the distinction between lesser-included

offenses, which may be requested by any party, or which the court has an independent duty to charge, and factually-related offenses, such as here, which may only be charged at the request of the defendant).

4 State v. Mirault, 92 N.J. 492, 498-99 (1983), holds that "another" can include a responding police officer or

someone else other than the victim of the theft.

ROBBERY IN THE SECOND DEGREE

(N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1)

b. threatened another with or purposel y put another in fear of immediate

bodily injury.

c. committed or threatened immediately to commit the crime of .5

As I have said, the State must prove, beyond a reasonable do ubt, that the defendant was

in the course of committing a theft. In this connection, you are advi sed that an act is considered

to be "in the course of committing a theft" if it occurs in an attempt 6 to commit the theft, during

the commission of the theft itself, or in immediate flight after the attempt or commission.7

Theft is defined as the unlawful taking or exercise of unlawful c ontrol over property of

another with purpose to deprive him/her thereof. 8

I have used the phrase "with purpose." You may hear me us e that phrase or the word

"purposely" again. I shall now explain what that means. A person acts purposely with respect to

the nature of his/her conduct or a result thereof if it is a person' s conscious object to engage in

conduct of that nature or to cause such a result.

In addition to proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defe ndant was in the course of

committing a theft, the State must also prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that while in the course

of committing that theft (charge the alternatives that foll ow, depending on the nature of the

case):

1. The defendant knowingly inflicted bodily injury or used force9 upon another.

A person acts knowingly with re spect to a result of his/her conduct if he/she is aware that

it is practically certain that his/her conduct w ill cause such a result. A person acts knowingly

with respect to the nature of his/her conduct if he /she is aware that his/her conduct is of that

nature.

The phrase "bodily injury" means physical pa in, illness, or any im pairment of physical

condition;

10

"Force" means an amount of physical power or strength used agains t the victim and not

simply against the victim's property. The force n eed not entail pain or bodily harm and need not

leave any mark. Nevertheless, the force must be greater than that necessary merely to snatch the

object from the victim's grasp or the victim's person, and the force must be directed against the

5 The statute refers to crimes of th e first or second degree. The proofs must indicate a specific crime and the

jury must be charged accordingly including a definition of that offense.

6 If attempt is involved, define attempt. See N.J.S.A. 2C:5-1a.

7 State v. Mirault, 92 N.J. at 500-01.

8 See N.J.S.A. 2C:20-1 and charge elements of theft appropriate to your case.

9 For theft from the person where the amount of force does not elevate the charge to robbery, see Model

Charge for N.J.S.A. 2C:20-3a (Theft of Movable Property).

10 See definition in N.J.S.A. 2C:11-1a.

ROBBERY IN THE SECOND DEGREE

(N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1)

victim, not merely the victim's property.11

(CHARGE THE FOLLOWING IF THERE IS AN ISSUE REGARDING THE

TIMING OF THE USE OF FORCE):

To find the defendant guilty of robbery, the intent to commit a theft must precede or be

coterminous with the use of force. In other words, the defendant mu st have formed the intent to

commit a theft before or during his/her use of for ce. If you find the defendant formed the intent

to commit a theft after his/her use of force, then he/she cannot be found guilty of robbery.12

[IF MULTIPLE VICTIMS ARE ALLEGED AND THE FACTS WARRANT, CHARGE

THE FOLLOWING:

To find the defendant guilty of robbery, you mu st be unanimous that the defendant used

force against (NAME OF VICTIM NUMBER ONE ) or (NAME OF VICTIM NUMBER

TWO). In other words, if you find that the defenda nt used force, but do not unanimously agree

that he/she used force against (THE NAME OF VICTIM), then the State has failed to prove the

existence of force beyond a reasonable doubt.13]

or

2. the defendant threatened another with or purposely put another in fear of

immediate bodily injury.

The phrase "bodily injury" means physical pain , illness or any impairment of physical

condition.14 (Although no bodily injury need have resu lted, the prosecution must prove that the

defendant either threatened the victim with or purposely put the victim in fear of such bodily

injury);

or

3. the defendant committed or threatened immediately to commit (here specify the

first or second degree crime alleged by the State and define to the extent

necessary) while in the course of committing the theft.

11 State v. Sein, 124 N.J. 209, 217-18 (1991).

12 State v. Lopez, 187 N.J. 91, 101 (2006).

13 See State v. Gentry, 183 N.J. 30 (2005). The court should use a special verdict form with an interrogatory

to determine if the jury found force against any particular victim.

14 See N.J.S.A. 2C:11-1a.

ROBBERY IN THE SECOND DEGREE

(N.J.S.A. 2C:15-1)

Should you find that the State has failed to prove any one of these elements of the crime

of robbery beyond a reasonable doubt, you must return a verdict of not guilty of robbery. If you

find the State has proved every one of the elements of the crime of robbery, then you must find

the defendant guilty as charged.15

15 If the jury could find that from the evidence ther e was a theft or attempted theft without the additional

elements involved in th e robbery, or if the jury could find that the theft and attendant flight were completed before

the assault took place, the jury should be charged the appropriate lesser included offense.