Fill and Sign the 839 Theft of Government Money or Propertymodel Jury Form

18 Theft Of Government Money Or Property 18 USC § 641 (First Paragraph) Title 18, United States Code, Section 641, makes it a Federal crime or offense for anyone to [embezzle] [steal] [convert] any money or property belonging to the United States having a value of more than $100. The Defendant can be found guilty of that offense only if all of the following facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt:First: That the money or property described in the indictment belonged to the United States; Second: That the Defendant [embezzled] [stole] [converted] such money or property to his own use or to the use of another; Third: That the Defendant did so knowingly and willfully with intent to deprive the owner of the use or benefit of the money or property so taken; and Fourth: That the money or property had a value in excess of $100. The word "value" means the face, par, or market value, or cost price, either wholesale or retail, whichever is greater. It is not necessary to prove that the Defendant knew that the Government owned the property at the time of the wrongful taking so long as it is established, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the Government did in fact own the money or property involved, that the Defendant knowingly and willfully [embezzled] [stole] [converted] it, and that it had a value in excess of $100. [To " embezzle" means t he wrongful or willful taking of money or property of someone else after the money or property has lawfully come within the possession or control of the person taking it.] [To "steal" or "convert" means the wrongful or willful taking of money or property belonging to someone else with intent to deprive the owner of its use or benefit either temporarily or permanently. No particular type of movement or carrying away is required to constitute a "taking, "as that word is used in these instruct ions.] Any appreciable change in the location of the property with the necessary willful intent constitutes a taking whether or not there is any actual removal of it from the owner' s premises.ANNOTATIONS AND COMMENTS18 USC § 64 1 (first paragraph) provides: Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts to his use or the use of another . . . any . . . money, or thing of value of the United States [having a value in excess of t he sum of $100] [shall be guilt y of an offense against the United States]. Maximum Penalty: Ten (10) years imprisonment and applicable fine; or if the value of the property taken does dot exceed $100, then one (1) year imprisonment and applicable fine. Government does not lose its property interest in an erroneously issued tax refund check payable to the defendant even where defendant who received the check has done nothing to induce the issuance of the check. United States v. M cRee, 7 F.3d 976 (11th Cir. 1993) (en banc), cert. denied, U.S., 114 S.Ct. 1649, 128 L.Ed.2d 368 (1994). When an out right grant is paid over to the end recipient , utilized, commingled or otherwise loses it s identity, the money in the grant ceases to be federal. United States v. Smith, 596 F.2d 662 (5th Cir. 1979). But federal grant money remains federal money even after being deposited in grantee's bank account and even if commingled with non-federal funds so long as the government exercises supervision and control over the funds and their ultimate use. Hayle v. United States, 815 F.2d 879 (2nd Cir. 1987), cited with approval in United States v. Hope, 90 1 F.2d 1013, 1019 (11t h Cir. 1990). Identifiable funds advanced by a HUD grantee to a subgrantee in anticipation of immediate federal reimbursement for purposes governed by and subject to federal statutes and regulations can be considered federal funds when those funds are diverted by the subgrantee prior to their delivery to the end recipient. United States v. Hope, supra. Elements of an embezzlement offense under this statute are: (1) that the money or property belonged to t he United States or an agency thereof [and had a value in excess of $100]; (2 ) that the property lawfully came into the possession or care of the defendant; (3) that the defendant fraudulently appropriated the money or property to his own use or the use of others; and (4) that the defendant did so knowingly and willfully with the intent either temporarily or permanently to deprive the owner of the use of the money or property so taken. United States v. Burton, 871 F.2d 1566 (11th Cir. 1 98 9). If the evidence justifies an instruction on the lesser included offense (theft of property having a value of $100 or less), see Special Instruct ion 10, Lesser Included Offense.