Grand theft is charged under penal code 487(a) pc making it a crime to take over $950 worth of property, money, or services from another without their consent.[1] If the value is $950 or below, then the appropriate charge is petty theft. The property value is measured by the fair market value and not the subjective guesses or sentimental value of the alleged victim.
It is not uncommon for someone to be charged with embezzlement or other related theft crime in connection with grand theft. Grand theft is a wobbler, which allows the prosecutor to charge someone with either a felony or misdemeanor.
What are the Elements of Grand Theft?
To be guilty of PC 487(a), the prosecutor must prove:
- You took and moved property
- The property did not belong to you
- You did not have consent from the owner
- You intended to permanently deprive the owner of the property, or for an extended period depriving them of significant enjoyment;
- The property had a fair market value of over $950.
What are the Defenses to PC 487(a)?
Good-Faith Claim of Right
If you actually believed that you have a right to the property even if that belief is mistaken or unreasonable, such a belief is a defense against grand theft.[2]
Consent from the Owner
Grand theft is not committed when the true owner of the property has given you permission unless the permission was by fraud, deceit, or trickery.
Community Property
If you take community property, then you are only guilty if you harbored the intent to deprive the other owner of the property permanently.[3]
Amount $950 or Less
The value of the property is measured at the time of the initial taking. The property is valued at its fair market value without regard to sentimental value to the purported victim. Accordingly, property valued at $950 or below will not meet the threshold value for grand theft.
Specific Intent
Grand theft requires specific intent. Therefore, if you acted with carelessness, negligence, accident, or by mistake, then you did harbor the specific intent.
What is the Punishment for California Grand Theft?
Grand theft is punishable as a misdemeanor or felony.
- A felony is punishable by 16 months, 2, or 3 years in jail.
- A misdemeanor carries up to 1 year in the county jail.
Other collateral consequences include:
- A felony conviction will prohibit firearm possession for life
- A conviction constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude
- Adverse immigration consequences for Non-U.S. citizens
- Loss or suspension of your professional license
Examples of Grand Theft
- A landlady believed she was entitled to take the tenant’s property for cleaning fees incurred. In this case, the defendant can assert the good-faith belief defense even if her belief was unreasonable.[4]
- While in a department store, Dan takes an item priced at $975 and presents it for a refund to the cashier.[5]
- Staying in an expensive hotel, or renting a vehicle, for an extended period of time with the intent of never paying for it.
Related Offenses
- Petty Theft – Penal Code 484(a) PC
- Shoplifting – Penal Code 459.5 PC
- Embezzlement – Penal Code 503 PC
- Identity Theft – Penal Code 530.5 PC
- Robbery – Penal Code 211 PC
Contact Us to Schedule a Free Consultation
If you have been charged with grand theft under PC 487(a), then you must enlist the help of an experienced Orange County criminal lawyer. Misdemeanor or felony charges carry significant life-changing penalties. Contact us today to schedule a free, confidential consultation to discuss all your options.
[1] Penal Code 487(a) – (“Grand theft is theft committed in any of the following cases: (a) When the money, labor, or real or personal property taken is of a value exceeding nine hundred fifty dollars ($950), except as provided in subdivision (b).”)
[2] See People v. Romo (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 514, 518.
[3] See People v. Llamas (1997) 51 Cal.App.4th 1729, 1738-1740.
[4] See In re Bayles (1920) 47 Cal.App. 517, 519-521 (Larceny conviction reversed where landlady actually believed she was entitled to take tenant’s property for cleaning fees incurred even if her belief was unreasonable).
[5] See People v. Davis (1998) 19 Cal.4th 301. The Supreme Court held that taking with the intent to fraudulently obtain a refund constitutes both an intent to permanently deprive the store of property and a trespassory taking within the meaning of larceny. (Id. at pp. 317-318; see also People v. Shannon (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 649.
