Bindinglaw

WI · jury_instructions

Wis JI-Criminal 1468

Issue of a Worthless Check: Misdemeanor

activein force · 2004-04-01 – presentas-observed

Statutory Definition of the Crime

Issue of a worthless check, as defined in § 943.24(1) of the Criminal Code of

Wisconsin, is committed by one who issues any check or other order for the payment of

money which, at the time of issuance, he or she intends shall not be paid.

State's Burden of Proof

Before you may find the defendant guilty of this offense, the State must prove by

evidence which satisfies you beyond a reasonable doubt that the following two elements

were present.

Elements of the Crime That the State Must Prove

1. The defendant issued a check. 1

A check is an unconditional order to pay money. 2

A check is issued when it is signed and delivered to another. 3

2. At the time the check was issued, the defendant intended that it not be paid.

This requires that the defendant issued the check knowing or believing that it

would not be paid. 4

Deciding About Intent

You cannot look into a person's mind to find intent. Intent must be found, if found at

all, from the defendant's acts, words, and statements, if any, and from all the facts and

circumstances in this case bearing upon intent.

READ THE FOLLOWING IF THERE IS EVIDENCE OF ONE OF THE

STATUTORILY-RECOGNIZED "PRIMA FACIE" CASES. 5

[Evidence has been received that at the time the defendant issued the check, there

was not enough money in the checking account on which the check was drawn and that

the defendant failed to pay the check within five days after receiving written notice that

the check was not paid, delivered by regular mail to either the person’s last known

address or the address provided on the check.

If you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant issued a check and that at

the time of issuance there was not enough money in the checking account on which the

check was drawn and that the defendant failed to pay the check within five days after

receiving written notice that the check was not paid, delivered by regular mail to either

the person’s last known address or the address provided on the check, you may find that

(he) (she) intended that it not be paid. You should not so find unless you are satisfied

beyond a reasonable doubt from all the evidence that at the time the defendant issued the

check (he) (she) intended that it would not be paid.] 6

READ ONE OF THE FOLLOWING WHEN SUPPORTED BY THE

EVIDENCE. 7

[The statute does not apply to a check given for a past consideration, that is, a check

given for a preexisting obligation or debt. Before you may find the defendant guilty, you

must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the check was not given for a past

consideration.]

[The statute does not apply to a postdated check. 8 Before you may find the defendant

guilty, you must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the check was not a

postdated check.]

Jury's Decision

If you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that both elements of this offense have

been proved, you should find the defendant guilty.

If you are not so satisfied, you must find the defendant not guilty.

History

Wis JI-Criminal 1468 (2004). Release No. 42, 4/2004. ©2004, Regents, Univ. of Wis. Prepared by the Wisconsin Criminal Jury Instructions Committee of the Wisconsin Judicial Conference with the University of Wisconsin Law School; posted by the Wisconsin State Law Library with the University's permission.

Provenance

Source
wilawlibrary.gov
Retrieved
2026-09-24
Edition
2026-09-24
Content hash
f10159d9d30dbafa14e7e9c369569f918c551e7590114f0cb3418b7b871729b5
View the official source →

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.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.