WPIC 73.02 Unlawful Issuance of a Bank Check—Felony—Elements
11A WAPRAC WPIC 73.02Washington Practice Series TMWashington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
11A Wash. Prac., Pattern Jury Instr. Crim. WPIC 73.02 (5th Ed)
Washington Practice Series TM
Washington Pattern Jury Instructions--Criminal
January 2024 Update
Part IX. Crimes Against Property
WPIC CHAPTER 73. Bank Checks—Unlawful Issuance
WPIC 73.02 Unlawful Issuance of a Bank Check—Felony—Elements
To convict the defendant of the crime of unlawful issuance of a bank check, each of the following elements of the crime must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) That on or about (date), the defendant, acting with intent to defraud, [made] [drew] [uttered] [or] [delivered] a check or draft to another person;
(2) That said check or draft was in an amount greater than $750;
(3) That
[at the time of such [making] [drawing] [uttering] [or] [delivery] the defendant knew that [he] [she] did not have sufficient funds in or credit with the bank or depository to meet the check or draft in full upon its presentation] [or]
[the defendant issued a stop-payment order directing the bank or depository on which the check is drawn not to honor the check, and failed to make payment of money in the amount of the check or draft or otherwise arrange a settlement agreed upon by the holder of the check within twenty days of issuing the check or draft];
and
(4) That any of these acts occurred in the State of Washington.
If you find from the evidence that each of these elements has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, then it will be your duty to return a verdict of guilty.
On the other hand, if after weighing all of the evidence you have a reasonable doubt as to any one of these elements, then it will be your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.
NOTE ON USE
Use bracketed material as applicable. Use WPIC 10.01 (Intent—Intentionally—Definition), WPIC 10.02 (Knowledge—Knowingly—Definition), and WPIC 79.10 (Unlawful Issuance of Bank Check—Credit—Definition) with this instruction.
It is preferable not to select the legalistic word “utter.” See discussion in the Note on Use and Comment to WPIC 130.01 (Forgery—Definition). If it is used, it should be defined.
If a series of transactions is relied upon to elevate the charge to a felony, use WPIC 73.20 (Unlawful Issuance of Bank Check—Common Scheme or Plan) with this instruction and include the existence of a common scheme or plan as a separate element in this elements instruction.
The instruction is drafted under the assumption that only one of the alternatives in element (3) will be used. If, in a given case, both of the bracketed paragraphs need to be included in element (3), then the instruction should be revised to follow the format for a to-convict instruction involving alternative means. See WPIC 4.20 (Introduction) and the Note on Use and Comment to WPIC 4.23 (Elements of the Crime—Alternative Elements—Alternative Means for Committing a Single Offense—Form).
For a discussion of the phrase “any of these acts” in element (4), see WPIC 4.20 (Introduction) and the Note on Use to WPIC 4.21 (Elements of the Crime—Form).
COMMENT
RCW 9A.56.060.
The crime is a felony if the check is in an amount greater than $750. The amount is an element of the felony. The cases under the former statute, RCW 9.44.060, on uttering forged instruments, may be consulted for a definition of “utter.”
[Current as of September 2018.]
Westlaw. © 2024 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works.
| End of Document |