Criminal Jury Instructions Home

10.3-1A  Identity Theft -- §§ 53a-129a, § 53a-129b, § 53a-129c, and § 53a-129d

Revised to December 1, 2007; archived April 23, 2010

Note:  This instruction is accurate for crimes committed before October 1, 2009.  Public Acts 2009, No. 09-239, §§ 1-3, redefined identify theft and added provision with a lower dollar amount if the victim is over 60 years of age.

Note:  Identity theft is defined in § 53a-129a.  The degree of identity theft depends on the value of the items obtained.  See § 53a-129b (first degree: exceeds $10,000); § 53a-129c (second degree: exceeds $5,000); § 53a-129d (third degree: no value specified).

The defendant is charged [in count __] with identity theft in the (first / second / third) degree.  The statute defining this offense reads in pertinent part as follows:

a person commits identity theft when (he/she) intentionally obtains personal identifying information of another person without the authorization of such other person and uses such information to obtain [or attempt to obtain] (money / credit / goods / services / property / medical information¹) in the name of such other person without the consent of such other person.

For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

Element 1 - Obtained information without authorization
The first element is that the defendant intentionally obtained the personal identifying information of the complainant without (his/her) authorization.  A person acts "intentionally" with respect to a result when (his/her) conscious objective is to cause such result.  <See Intent: Specific, Instruction 2.3-1.>

"Personal identifying information" means any name, number or other information that may be used, alone or in conjunction with any other information, to identify a specific individual including, but not limited to, such individual's name, date of birth, mother's maiden name, motor vehicle operator's license number, Social Security number, employee identification number, employer or taxpayer identification number, alien registration number, government passport number, health insurance identification number, demand deposit account number, savings account number, credit card number, debit card number or unique biometric data such as fingerprint, voice print, retina or iris image, or other unique physical representation.

Element 2 - Used information without consent
The second element is that the defendant used the personal identifying information to obtain [or attempt to obtain] (money / credit / goods / services / property / medical information) in the name of such other person without the consent of such other person.  A person does an act "without consent of another person" when (he/she) lacks such other person's agreement or assent to engage in the act.  

[<Include element 3 only for first and second degree:>

Element 3 - Value of property obtained
The third element is the value of the <identify property> obtained by the defendant using <insert name of complainant>'s personal identifying information.  The value of the (money / credit / goods / services / property) obtained [or attempted to be obtained] must exceed <insert as appropriate:>

• First degree:  $10,000.

• Second degree:  $5,000.

For purposes of determining whether the state has proved the alleged degree of identity theft, the value of the (money / credit / goods / services / property)  shall be ascertained as follows:  "Value" here means the market value of the goods, services, or property at the time and place of the crime.  "Market value" means the price that would, in all probability, result from fair negotiations between willing buyers and sellers at the time and place of the crime; the probability being based upon the evidence in the case.

If you can determine the price the property sold for at the time of the crime, then that is the controlling value.  If the market value cannot be determined, then you should consider the replacement cost of the goods or services within a reasonable time after the crime.]

Conclusion

In summary, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant 1) intentionally obtained <insert name of complainant>'s personal identifying information without the consent of <insert name of complainant> [and] 2) used that information to obtain [or attempt to obtain] something of value in the name of the complainant, [<insert only for first or second degree:>, and 3) the value of the <identify property> exceeded ($10,000 / $5,000).]

If you unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements of the crime of identity theft in the (first / second / third) degree, then you shall find the defendant guilty.  On the other hand, if you unanimously find that the state has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any of the elements, you shall then find the defendant not guilty.
_______________________________________________________

¹ Medical information would only be relevant to third degree, as it has no assignable dollar value.