US-CA9 · jury_instructions
9th Cir. Model Jury Instr. (Criminal) 15.1
Fraud in Connection with Identification Documents —Production (18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(1))
The defendant is charged in [Count ______ of] the indictment with producing without legal authority [an identification document] [an authentication feature] [a false identification document] in violation of Section 1028(a)(1) of Title 18 of the United States Code. For the defendant to be found guilty of that charge, the government must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, the defendant knowingly produced [an identification document] [an authentication feature] [a false identification document];
Second, the defendant produced the [identification document] [authentication feature] [false identification document] without lawful authority; and
[Third, the [identification document] [authentication feature] [false identification document] was or appeared to be issued by or under authority of [the United States] [specify issuing authority].]
or
[Third, the production of the [identification document] [authentication feature] [false identification document] was in or affected commerce between one state and [an]other state[s], or between a state of the United States and a foreign country.]
or
[Third, in the course of production, the [identification document] [authentication feature] [false identification document] was transported in the mail.]
Provenance
- Source
- ce9.uscourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- 2026-08-20
- Content hash
c1b89852080600d5c516679e0debf87b14956d8862344b416688cfaf4afbc85d
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.