CHAPTER 26Receiving or Concealing Stolen Property
MCrim JI 26.1 Receiving and Concealing Stolen Property
(1)[The defendant is charged with the crime of / You may also consider the lesser charge of] knowingly [buying / receiving / possessing / concealing / aiding in the concealment of] stolen1 property. To prove this charge, the prosecutor must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
(2)First, that some property was stolen [or explicitly represented to the defendant as being stolen / embezzled / converted property].1
(3)(3) Second, that the defendant [bought / received / possessed / concealed / aided in the concealment of] that property.2
(4)(4) Third, that the defendant knew or had reason to know or reason to believe that the property was stolen when [he / she] [bought / received / possessed / concealed / aided in the concealment of] it.3
[Choose (5) or (6) as applicable:]
(5)Fourth, that the property was a motor vehicle.
(6)Fourth, that the property had a fair market value when it was [bought / received / possessed / concealed] of:4
[Choose only one of the following unless instructing on lesser offenses:]
(a)$20,000 or more.
(b)$1,000 or more, but less than $20,000.
(c)$200 or more, but less than $1,000.
(d) some amount less than $200.
[Use the following paragraph only if applicable:]
(7)[You may add together the value of property [bought / received / possessed / concealed] in separate incidents if part of a scheme or course of conduct within a 12-month period when deciding whether the prosecutor has proved the amount required beyond a reasonable doubt.]
Use Note
1 Where appropriate, substitute “embezzled” or “converted” for “stolen.”
2 The definition of buy, receive, possess, or conceal (whichever is alleged), CJI2d 26.2, should be given where appropriate.
3 If the crime is receiving or concealing a stolen firearm, MCL 750.535b, Michigan law requires actual notice rather than constructive notice that the firearm was stolen. People v Granderson, No 297838, 2011 Mich App LEXIS 1527 (Aug 25, 2011) (unpublished).
4 The Fair Market Value Test, CJI2d 22.1, should be given where applicable.
History
M Crim JI 26.1 (formerly CJI2d 26.1) was CJI 26:1:01; amended September, 1999, to reflect changes made by 1998 PA 311, eff. January 1, 1999; amended May 2007, to reflect changes made to MCL 750.535 by 2006 PA 374, eff. October 1, 2006; amended May 2008.
Reference Guide
Statutes
MCL 750.535, .535b.
Case Law
People v Kamin, 405 Mich 482, 275 NW2d 777 (1979); People v Allay, 171 Mich App 602, 608, 430 NW2d 794 (1988); People v Toodle, 155 Mich App 539, 400 NW2d 670 (1986); People v Fortuin, 143 Mich App 279, 372 NW2d 530 (1985).