20.7 WELFARE FRAUD — ADMINISTRATOR MISAPPROPRIATING

To prove the crime of Welfare Fraud — Administrator Misappropriating, the State must prove the following [two] [three] elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

§ 414.39(3)(a), Fla. Stat.

1. (Defendant) had duties [in the administration of a state or federally funded assistance program] [in the distribution of state or federally funded public assistance] [or] [in the authorizations or identifications of those to obtain public assistance under a state or federally funded public assistance program].

2. (Defendant), by virtue of [his] [her] position, [had been entrusted with] [gained possession of] [food assistance] [an authorization for food assistance] [a certificate of eligibility for prescribed medicine] [a Medicaid identification card] [or] [public assistance from any state or federally funded program].

3. (Defendant) [fraudulently misappropriated] [attempted to misappropriate] [or] [aided and abetted another in the misappropriation of] [food assistance] [an authorization for food assistance] [a certificate of eligibility for prescribed medicine] [a Medicaid identification card] [or] [public assistance from any state or federally funded program].

§ 414.39(3)(b), Fla. Stat.

1. (Defendant) had duties [in the administration of a state or federally funded assistance program] [in the distribution of state or federally funded public assistance] [or] [in the authorizations or identifications of those to obtain public assistance under a state or federally funded public assistance program].

2. (Defendant) knowingly [misappropriated] [attempted to misappropriate] [aided or abetted another in the misappropriation of] [funds given in exchange for food assistance program benefits] [any form of food assistance benefits authorization].

§ 414.39(5), Fla. Stat.

If you find (Defendant) guilty of Welfare Fraud, you must also determine if the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt whether the value of the public assistance or identification wrongfully [received] [retained] [misappropriated] [sought] [used] was:

a. less than an aggregate value of $200 in any 12 consecutive months.

b. an aggregate value of $200 or more, but less than $20,000 in any 12 consecutive months.

c. an aggregate value of $20,000 or more, but less than $100,000 in any 12 consecutive months.

d. $100,000 or more in any 12 consecutive months.

Inferences. Give as applicable.

§ 414.39(8)(a), Fla. Stat.

You may conclude that (defendant) did receive public assistance from the state if you find that there was a paid state warrant made to the order of the defendant.

§ 414.39(8)(b), Fla. Stat.

You may conclude that an identified recipient received public assistance from the state if you find that a transaction history generated by a Personal Identification Number (PIN) established a purchase or withdrawal by electronic benefit transfer.