You are here

8.139 Attempted Mail Theft

Printer-friendly version

8.139 ATTEMPTED MAIL THEFT
(18 U.S.C. § 1708)

The defendant is charged in [Count _______ of] the indictment with attempted mail theft in violation of Section 1708 of Title 18 of the United States Code.  For the defendant to be found guilty of that charge, the government must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

            First, the defendant intended to steal mail from a [post office] [letter box] [a private mail box] [mail receptacle] [mail route] [authorized depository for mail matter] [mail carrier]; and

            Second, the defendant did something that was a substantial step toward stealing the mail and that strongly corroborated the defendant’s intent to commit the crime.

            Mere preparation is not a substantial step toward committing the crime.  To constitute a substantial step, a defendant’s act or actions must unequivocally demonstrate that the crime will take place unless interrupted by independent circumstances.

            Jurors do not need to agree unanimously as to which particular act or actions constituted a substantial step toward the commission of a crime. 

Comment

            “To constitute a substantial step, a defendant’s actions must cross the line between preparation and attempt by unequivocally demonstrating that the crime will take place unless interrupted by independent circumstances.”  United States v. Goetzke, 494 F.3d 1231, 1237 (9th Cir. 2007) (internal quotations omitted). 

            The “strongly corroborated” language in this instruction comes from United States v. Snell, 627 F.2d 186, 187 (9th Cir. 1980) (“A conviction for attempt requires proof of culpable intent and conduct constituting a substantial step toward commission of the crime that strongly corroborates that intent”) and United States v. Darby, 857 F.2d 623, 625 (9th Cir. 1988) (same).

            Jurors do not need to agree unanimously as to which particular act or actions constituted a substantial step toward the commission of a crime.  United States v. Hofus, 598 F.3d 1171, 1176 (9th Cir. 2010).

           “[A] person may be convicted of an attempt to commit a crime even though that person may have actually completed the crime.”  United States v. Rivera-Relle, 333 F.3d 914, 921 (9th Cir. 2003). 

Approved 6/2021