Bindinglaw

WI · jury_instructions

Wis JI-Criminal 2152

Failure to Support

activein force · 2006-05-01 – presentas-observed

Statutory Definition of the Crime

Failure to support, as defined in § 948.22 of the Criminal Code of Wisconsin, is

committed by one who intentionally fails for 120 or more consecutive days 2 to provide

spousal or child support 3 which the person knows or reasonably should know the person

is legally obligated to provide.

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 three elements

were present.

Elements of the Crime That the State Must Prove

1. The defendant intentionally failed to provide (spousal) (child) support. 4

"Intentionally" means that the defendant had the mental purpose to fail to

pay support or was aware that his conduct was practically certain to cause that

result. 5

IF THERE IS EVIDENCE THAT THE DEFENDANT FAILED TO

PAY SUPPORT REQUIRED UNDER A COURT ORDER, 6 ADD

THE FOLLOWING: 7

[Evidence has been received that the defendant failed to pay support

payments required by a court order.

If you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew or

reasonably should have known that (he) (she) was required to pay support under

a court order and failed to pay support payments as required, you may find that

the failure to provide support was intentional, but you are not required to do so.

You must not find that the failure to support was intentional unless you are so

satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt from all the evidence in the case.]

ADD THE FOLLOWING IF SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE.

[It is not a defense that support was provided wholly or partially by any other

person.] 8

2. The failure to provide support continued for 120 or more consecutive days. 9

3. The defendant (knew) (reasonably should have known) that (he) (she) was

legally obligated to provide the (spousal) (child) support.

Jury's Decision

If you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that all three 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 2152 (2006). Release No. 44, 5/2006. © 2006, 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
9a9b1538ec37db8017974478001ac0e9b3c15d89cd42523df7a6a61811da5d5c
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.