10.7-1 Criminal Impersonation -- § 53a-130 (a) (1) and (3)
Revised to December 1, 2007 (modified November 6, 2014)
The defendant is charged [in count __] with criminal impersonation. The statute defining this offense reads in pertinent part as follows:
a person is guilty of criminal impersonation when (he/she) <insert appropriate subsection:>
§ 53a-130 (a) (1): impersonates another and does an act in such assumed character with the intent to (obtain a benefit / injure another / defraud another).
§ 53a-130 (a) (3): pretends to be a representative of some person or organization and does an act in such pretended capacity with intent to (obtain a benefit / injure another / defraud another).
For you to find the defendant guilty of this charge, the state must prove the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
Element 1 - Impersonated
The first element is that the defendant, by (his/her) words or conduct, impersonated <insert as appropriate:>
a representative of <insert name of person or organization>.
To "impersonate" means to act the part of or to mimic the appearance or manner or adopt the personal identifying characteristics or information. The person or organization impersonated must actually exist.
Element 2 - Intent
The second element is that in performing some acts while pretending to be someone else, (he/she) intended to (obtain a benefit / injure another / defraud another).
In summary, the state must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant 1) pretended to be <insert name of person>, and 2) while pretending to be <insert name of person>, (he/she) intended to (obtain a benefit / injure another / defraud another).
If you unanimously find that the state has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each of the elements of the crime of criminal impersonation, 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.
Subsection (2) was changed to (3), effective October 1, 2014.
For a conviction to be valid the
defendant must be found to have impersonated a real person. "The statute as
written does not prohibit giving a false name; it prohibits impersonating
another." State v. Smith, 194 Conn. 213, 222 (1984); see also State
v. Bradley, 60 Conn. App. 534, 539, cert. denied, 255 Conn. 921 (2000). In
State v. Moore, 97 Conn. 243, 249, appeal withdrawn (2006), the Court upheld the defendant's conviction for impersonating
another, even though that person had previously given a false name to the