Have you been accused of a crime?
Call for a free consultation 24/7 toll-free:
(888) 744-7730

California Shoplifting Defense Lawyers

California Penal Code § [Section] 459.5(a) – Shoplifting

California Penal Code [CPC] §459.5(a)Shoplifting – Penal Code Section 459.5 makes it illegal to enter a commercial establishment with the intent to steal while the establishment is open during regular business hours. The value of the property must not exceed $950. “Any other entry into a commercial establishment with intent to commit larceny is burglary.”[1]

If you're convicted of a misdemeanor act of shoplifting, the penalty may be six months in a county jail, a $1,000 fine, or both a fine and jail time. However, if you're convicted of a felony, the penalty for a first offense may be up to three years in a state prison and/or a fine of up to $10,000.

Remember: A felony violation of Section 459.5 is punishable under California's “Three Strikes” system. If you receive three “strikes” on your record, you'll serve a minimum of twenty-five years in state prison.[2]

What Does California Penal Code §459.5(a) [Shoplifting] Prohibit?

In sum, to be guilty of Shoplifting under CPC §459.5(a), you must:

  • Enter a commercial establishment during business hours; AND,
  • Intend on committing theft when you enter.

Defining “Shoplifting” Under California Penal Code §459.5(a)

To convict you under §459.5(a), the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

  • COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT: You entered[3] a commercial establishment; AND,
  • REGULAR BUSINESS HOURS: When you entered the establishment, it was open during regular business hours; AND,
  • INTENT: When you entered the commercial establishment, you intended to commit theft; AND,
  • WORTH $950 OR LESS: The property you intended to take, or took, was worth $950 or less.

Example: Defendant Douglas enters Victim Victor's computer store one business day with the intent to steal a $50 video game. However, seeing that he can take a great deal more, Douglas steals a $500 game console. He is apprehended in the parking lot and charged under CPC §459.5(a). Douglas defends himself by saying that he changed his mind about what to steal when inside the store. Is Douglas guilty?

Conclusion: Douglas entered Victor's store with the intent to steal. He did so during business hours. The property in question was worth less than $950. These are the elements of the offense. That he changed his mind about the property to take is, under the circumstances, irrelevant. Douglas is guilty as charged.

Penalties For Shoplifting Under CPC §459.5(a)

If you're convicted of Shoplifting, the Felony penalty may be:

  • A term of up to three (3) years in a state prison;[4] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[5]

However, if you're convicted of Shoplifting, the Misdemeanor penalty may be:

  • A term of up to six (6) months in a county jail; OR,
  • A fine of up to $1,000 (one-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[6]

Since you can be charged with a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on whether you have a prior violent offense or sex offense conviction of your record,[7]  Shoplifting is a “wobbler”[8] crime in California. If you're convicted under Section 459.5(a), the Felony penalty may be up to three (3) years in a state prison,[9] a fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars), or both a fine and imprisonment.[10] If you're convicted of the Misdemeanor form, you face up to six (6) months in a county jail, a fine of not more than $1,000 (one-thousand dollars), or both a fine and imprisonment.[11]

Note: Penal Code Section 459.5 is punishable under California's “Three Strikes” system. If you accrue three “strikes” on your record, you will serve a minimum of twenty-five (25) years in a state prison.[12]

Defenses Against California Penal Code §459.5(a) – Shoplifting

Four common defenses against a charge of Shoplifting under CPC §459.5(a) are:

You Didn't Form The Intent To Steal Until After You'd Entered The Establishment

Example: Defendant Davida enters Victim Viola's candy shop with the intent of buying a specific lollipop. However, seeing that she's thirty cents shy of the asking price, she ends up pocketing the sweet. Viola sees her, reports her, and has her charged under §459.5(a). Davida insists she is innocent. Is she guilty?

Conclusion: Davida committed a crime when she stole the lollipop. To commit an act of shoplifting, however, Davida had to enter the store with the intent of stealing the candy. Instead, she decided to steal once inside the candy store. Therefore, while Davida can be punished for Petty Theft,[13] she is not guilty of Shoplifting. Davida didn't form the intent to steal until after she'd entered the establishment.

Diversion Is Appropriate In Your Case

Example: Defendant Dmitri is facing charges under CPC §459.5(a). Storekeeper alleges that Dmitri stole an Apple Watch worth $850. Dmitri still has the watch. He offers to return the watch, plead guilty, and perform community service – but he asks that the guilty plea be stayed,[14] and that it be entered only if he fails to perform his community service. Should prosecutors consider Dmitri's offer, on these facts?   

Conclusion: Dmitri has asked for a form of informal diversion instead of a jail sentence and/or a fine. He has offered to plead guilty in exchange for avoiding a guilty judgment against him. If he pleads guilty, returns the watch and completes his service, he will have made amends to an extent that it will justify withdrawing all charges. Prosecutors should consider Dmitri's offer. Diversion is appropriate in his case.   

You Were Mistaken About The Facts

Example: Defendant Dominic believes wrongly that Best Friend has paid for his beer at Victim Vito's liquor store. He takes a six-pack and walks out. An alarm sounds and Vito responds by calling police. Now Dominic faces charges under CPC §459.5(a). He swears he wouldn't have stolen anything if he'd known the facts. Best Friend is willing to testify to these events as well. Should Dominic be convicted?

Conclusion: Dominic only appeared to steal the six-pack from Vito because he wrongly believed that Best Friend had paid for the product. In fact, he did nothing punishable under CPC §459.5(a) because of this misapprehension. Best Friend will attest to all of this, if required. Thus, Dominic should be acquitted under these circumstances. He was mistaken about the facts. 

You've Agreed To Make Restitution To The Shopkeeper

Example: Defendant Dane admits that he stole a box of cigars worth $200 from Victim Vi's tobacco shop. He also admits that he completed an act punishable as Shoplifting. Still, Dane says prosecutors shouldn't proceed with charges against him under CPC §459.5(a) because he and Vi have agreed that Dane will repay the full cost of the cigars to Vi. Should prosecutors charge Dane, under these circumstances?

Conclusion: Dane and Vi reached a compromise which satisfies Vi, the aggrieved party to the agreement. For Dane, it'll be as though he purchased the cigars; for Vi, it'll be as though the theft never occurred. Vi will receive the full value of the cigars. Under these circumstances, there's little reason to pursue charges. Prosecutors shouldn't charge Dane. He has agreed to make restitution to the shopkeeper.

Related Offenses

Note: The crimes below are described generally as “related” because they're frequently charged with CPC §459.5(a) and/or have common elements the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

The California Penal Code includes several offenses related to Shoplifting: Petty Theft (CPC §484(a)), Petty Theft with a Prior Offense (CPC §666(a)), Receiving Stolen Property (CPC §496(a)), Grand Theft (CPC §487), Robbery (CPC §211), Misappropriation Of Public Funds (CPC §424(a)), Burglary (CPC §459), Forgery (CPC §470(a)), and Extortion (CPC §518).

Petty Theft

California's statute criminalizing Petty Theft (CPC §§484(a)) applies, broadly, whenever property is taken without the owner's permission. The property must be worth $950 or less. It cannot be a firearm or an automobile. Petty Theft also does not require the use of fear or force. You must, however, move the property and keep it for some period. The crime is related to Shoplifting because property of lesser value is often stolen in commercial establishments, permitting, in the same trial, charges of both crimes.

If you are convicted of Petty Theft, the penalty may be:

  • A term of up to six (6) months in a county jail; OR,
  • A fine of up to $1,000 (one-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[15]

California Jury Instructions – Petty Theft

To convict you under CPC §484(a), the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You took property which was worth $950 or less. When you took it, you intended on taking it permanently or removing it for long enough that the owner would lose a major portion of its value or enjoyment of it. Finally, you moved and kept it for some amount of time.

Example: Defendant Donice, a college student, is desperate to finish a term paper. His computer breaks. Victim Vincente, who shares Donice's apartment, has a working Notebook worth $900. Donice uses the machine for a few hours, then returns it to Vincente's room. Later, when Donice mentions doing this, Vincente accuses him of stealing the computer and has him charged under CPC §484(a). Is Donice guilty?

Conclusion: Donice took a piece of property worth less than $950 from Vincente's room. He moved it. He kept it for hours. These are elements of the offense. But Donice intended on using the Notebook to write a paper. When he was done, he returned it. Furthermore, Vincente didn't lose a major portion of the computer's use or value; he didn't even know it was used until Donice told him. Donice is innocent.   

Petty Theft With A Prior Offense

Petty Theft With A Prior Offense (CPC §666(a)) involves being convicted of theft crime (including burglary, carjacking, robbery, or a felony violation of Section 496), serving a term for it in any penal institution or being imprisoned as a condition of probation for the offense, and subsequently being convicted of a Petty Theft. The statute is related to Shoplifting because one of the prior offenses covered by the law is Petty Theft. 

Petty Theft With A Prior Offense can be charged as either a Misdemeanor or a Felony, depending on the facts of your case, which makes CPC §666(a) a “wobbler” crime.[16] If you're convicted of Petty Theft With A Prior Offense for the first time, the felony penalty may be:

  • A term of up to three (3) years in a state prison;[17] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[18]

California Criminal Jury Instructions - Petty Theft With A Prior Offense

To convict you under §666(a), the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You have been found guilty of a petty theft. You were also previously convicted of a theft offense and served a term in a penal institution for that conviction.

Example: Defendant Dickie has a record including for Petty Theft. He was sentenced to a Department of Corrections youth camp for the offense. But now Dickie faces a charge under §666(a) because he has been convicted of stealing something else. He insists he isn't eligible for conviction; after all, he says, he only went to a youth camp the first time. Is Dickie correct or should he be convicted of the offense?

Conclusion: Dickie has a prior conviction for a petty theft on his record. Now he has been convicted of stealing something else. These are elements of the crime under §666(a). The remaining issue is whether a youth camp qualifies as “a penal institution.” The jury instructions make it clear that camps operated by the Department of Corrections are penal institutions. Dickie is incorrect. He should be convicted. 

Receiving Stolen Property

California law on Receiving Stolen Property (CPC §496(a)) applies whenever anyone buys or receives property that's been stolen or extorted, knowing how the property was obtained. The law also applies to concealing, selling, withholding, or aiding someone in concealing, selling, or withholding property from the owner, if you know how it was obtained. 

Receiving Stolen Property can be charged as either a Misdemeanor or a Felony, depending on the facts of your case, which makes CPC §496(a) a “wobbler” crime.[19] The charge is related to Shoplifting because goods stolen from commercial establishments often end up being resold, creating the possibility of Receiving Stolen Property charges in the same trial.

If you're convicted of the Felony form of Receiving Stolen Property, the penalty may be:

  • A term of up to three (3) years in state prison;[20] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[21]

You can find more information in the California Property Crimes Defense Attorneys section of the Kann California Law Group's website. Feel free to contact the Kann California Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County. Your call will go directly to a lawyer - guaranteed.

California Criminal Jury Instructions – Receiving Stolen Property

To convict you under CPC §496(a), the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You bought, received, sold, aided in selling, or concealed or withheld property that had been stolen from its owner or obtained by extortion. Additionally, when you were involved with the property, you knew it had been stolen or obtained by extortion.

Example: Defendant Dillon is contacted by Friend. They were inmates at LA Correctional Facility. Friend wants to return to theft, his criminal profession. Dillon doesn't want to get involved. He does, however, give him the name of Fence, who purchases stolen goods, if Friend should need to sell anything. Friend later gives Dillon's name to police when he's arrested. Police charge Dillon under §496(a). Is he guilty?

Conclusion: Dillon provided Friend with the name of a person who knowingly purchases stolen property. These would be elements of the crime. However, Friend had not actually stolen anything at the time he received Fence's name. Dillon, it follows, couldn't have known he was dealing with property that had been stolen; again, there was no such property when he dealt with Friend. Dillon, therefore, is innocent.

Grand Theft

California's statute criminalizing Grand Theft (CPC §487) applies, broadly, whenever property is taken with value exceeding $950. The crime also applies to automobile theft and the theft or firearms. Grand Theft does not require the use of fear or force. You must, however, move the property and keep it for some period. The crime is related to Shoplifting because a charge under Section 459.5(a) is a potential alternative to a Grand Theft allegation.

The facts surrounding your case will determine the severity of the charge. This makes Grand Theft a “wobbler”[22] crime in California. If you're convicted of a felony grand theft, the penalty may be:

  • A term of up to three (3) years in a state prison;[23] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both imprisonment and a fine.[24]

Note: Grand theft involving a firearm is considered a “serious felony,”[25] making it punishable under the state's “Three Strikes” system. If you amass three “strikes” on your record, you'll serve at least twenty-five years in a state prison.[26]

You can find more information in the Grand Theft section of the Kann California Law Group's website. Feel free to contact the Kann California Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County. Your call will go directly to a lawyer – and that's always guaranteed.

California Criminal Jury Instructions – Grand Theft

To convict you under CPC §487, the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You took someone else's automobile, firearm, or property which was worth more than $950. When you took it, you intended on taking it permanently or removing it for long enough that the owner would lose a major portion of its value or enjoyment of it. Finally, you moved and kept it for some amount of time.

Example: Defendant Drake takes Victim Vera's truck. He keeps it overnight and returns it late the next morning. By then, Vera, who needed to take the truck to work earlier that morning, has missed work and lost her job because of it. She insists Drake violated Section 487(d)(1) even though Drake returned the truck. Drake insists this isn't possible. Is he correct, or could Drake be convicted, on these facts?

Conclusion: Drake took an automobile that wasn't his. It can be assumed that the truck, in working order, was worth more than $950. He moved it and kept it for some time. These are elements of the crime. The issue is whether Vera lost a major portion of its use or value. This could be easily concluded, considering that Vera lost her job owing to the missing truck. Drake is incorrect. He could be convicted.

Robbery

Robbery (CPC §211) involves using force or fear to take property from another person with the intent of not returning it. Robbery is linked to Shoplifting because takings punishable as petty thefts are often the purpose of robbing commercial establishments.

Robbery is considered both a “serious” [27] and “violent felony”[28] under state law. Thus, it's subject to sentence enhancement under California's “Three Strikes” system. Three “strikes” on your record will result in a minimum of twenty-five years in state prison.[29] If you're convicted of first-degree Robbery, the penalty, without enhancement, may be:

  • A term of up to nine (9) years in a state prison;[30] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[31]

Note: The intent to take property must have been formed before or during the use of force or fear.

Further information can be found in the Robbery section of the Kann California Law Group's website. Feel free to contact the Kann California Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County. All calls go directly to a lawyer. We guarantee it.

California Jury Instructions – Robbery

To convict you under CPC §211, the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You used force or fear to take property that was in the presence of another person. You took the property against that person's will. Finally, you intended to remove the property from the person's possession long enough that the person would not enjoy a major part of its value.

Example: Defendant Devries robs a bank using an extremely realistic looking toy gun that terrifies bank employees. He gets away with a large amount of cash. But Devries is arrested at home two days later. He's charged under CPC §211. Devries defends himself by noting that the toy gun he used “couldn't harm a fly, much less a person.” Should Devries be convicted, under these circumstances? 

Conclusion: Devries used “an extremely realistic looking toy gun” to get bank employees to surrender the bank's money to him, albeit against their will. (We can assume they didn't want to because Devries had to threaten them.) He took the money to his house for days. These are the elements of the crime. Since the toy weapon scared bank employees enough to take bank money, he should be convicted.

Misappropriation Of Public Funds

Misappropriation Of Public Funds (CPC §424(a)) involves taking public money for your own use or another person's use without legal authority. It is also illegal to loan or profit from public money or to make a false entry in accounting for public money. The statute also makes it a crime to refuse to disburse public money to a legal authority, to fail to transfer public money when required by law, or to fail or refuse to disburse money to a person authorized to receive that money, despite having a legal duty to do so. The crime is related to Shoplifting because a charge under Section 424(a) is an alternative to a Shoplifting charge where public money is involved.

If you're convicted of Misappropriation Of Public Funds, which is always a felony,[32] the penalty may be:

  • A term of up to four (4) years in a state prison;[33] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment;[34] AND,
  • Disqualification from holding office in California.[35]

California Jury Instructions – Misappropriation Of Public Funds

To convict you under CPC §424(a), the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

While responsible for public money, you took some money for your own or someone else's use without legal authority, or you loaned, made a profit from, or used some of that money without legal authority, or you kept a false account or made a false entry in an account of the money, or you changed, falsified, hid or obliterated an accounting of that money, or you refused or failed to disburse public money in response to a draft drawn by competent authority, or you failed to transfer money when required by law, or you failed or refused to disburse money that you'd received to a person legally authorized to receive that money, despite having a legal duty to do so. Additionally, you knew you weren't following the law, or you acted without legal authority, or you were criminally negligent in failing to know legal restrictions on your conduct.

Example: Defendant Debra, an accountant with the City of Westwood, has access to government accounts. She gets a tip about a stock. Though she knows she has no authority to do it, she dips into a government account to buy stock for Westwood. Westwood makes a fortune. But police hear about it and charge her under §424(a). She says she can't be guilty because the city made money. Is she correct?

Conclusion: Debra, who was responsible for public money (she had access to government accounts as part of her job), knowingly used public money without having legal authority to do so. True, the city did not lose money on Debra's unauthorized investment, but this is beside the point, for purposes of Section 424(a). Debra violated the law simply through unauthorized use of the public funds. She is incorrect.

Burglary

Penal Code §459 creates the crime of Burglary, which occurs any time someone enters a building with the intent to commit Theft or a felony inside the structure. The crime is related to Shoplifting because a charge under Section 459 is an alternative to a Shoplifting charge where theft from a building or vehicle is involved, especially a commercial establishment.

Burglaries inside homes, vessels, floating homes or trailers are first-degree burglaries. All other forms are in the second degree. This makes Burglary a “wobbler” offense.[36] If you're convicted of Burglary in the first degree, the penalty can be:

  • A term of up to six (6) years in a state prison;[37] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[38]

Note:  You must form the intent commit the burglary at or before the time of entering the structure.

More information can be found in the California Burglary Defense Lawyers section of the Kann California Law Group's website. If you have questions, contact any of the Kann California Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County.  An attorney will take your call. That's guaranteed.

California Jury Instructions – Burglary

To convict you under CPC §459, the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You entered a building, a locked vehicle, or a structure intending to commit a felony or a theft involving property worth more than $950, or you entered a noncommercial establishment, or you entered a commercial establishment outside business hours with the same intent.

Example:  Defendant Duma admits that she broke into Victim Vero's locked car. She admits to stealing a laptop computer worth more than $1500. She confesses to a grand theft under Section 487.[39] Nonetheless, she insists that she can't be charged under §459 because she didn't enter a commercial establishment to steal the computer. Is Duma correct or should she be convicted of Burglary as well?

Conclusion: Duma broke into a locked vehicle to commit a theft involving property with more than $950. These are the elements of the crime. While she believes she had to steal from a business, that is just one form of the offense. Breaking into a locked car is another. Duma is incorrect. She should be convicted. 

Forgery

Forgery (CPC §470(a)) occurs whenever anyone signs the name of another person or a fictitious person to any of the items listed in subdivision (d) of the statute. The crime is related to Shoplifting because Forgery can be used to acquire property or services in a commercial establishment, permitting the prosecution to charge you with both in the same trial.

Since you can be charged with a misdemeanor or a felony count, depending on the facts of your unique case, Forgery is a “wobbler” offense.[40] If you are convicted of felonious Forgery, the penalty may be:

  • A term of up to three (3) years in a state prison;[41] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[42]

More information can be found in the California Forgery Crime Lawyers section of the Kann California Law Group's website. If you have questions, contact any of the Kann California Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County.  An attorney will take your call. That is always guaranteed.

California Jury Instructions – Forgery

To convict you under CPC §470(a), the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You signed someone else's name or a false name to one of the documents listed in CPC §470(d). You did not have authority to sign that name. You knew that you did not have that authority. Finally, when you signed the document, you intended to defraud.

Example: Defendant Dee signs her name to Husband's credit card receipts when she uses his card. This is something he knows. Victim Verne, owner of a gas station, does not know about the arrangement. When Dee signs Husband's name to a receipt, Verne assumes she's committing forgery and calls police. She says she shouldn't be charged under these circumstances. Is Dee correct or should she be charged?

Conclusion: Dee, as the facts make clear, both uses Husband's card and signs his name, which Husband knows. Thus, she has consent to use the card. Additionally, the facts do not state that Dee had the intent to defraud Verne when she signed the receipt. Signing someone else's name is the only element of the offense present on these facts. Dee, it follows, is correct. Police should not charge her.

Extortion

The basic form of Extortion (CPC §518(a)), ‘Extortion By Threat Or Force,' occurs whenever a person obtains valuables or official acts from another, with his or her consent, through wrongful use of force or fear, or under a claim of an official right. The threat “may involve harm to be inflicted by [you] or by someone else.”[43] Extortion is connected to Shoplifting because an extortionate threat can be part of a commercial theft, which allows the prosecution to charge you with both crimes in the same trial.

If you're convicted of Extortion under CPC §518(a), a Felony, the penalty may be:

  • A term of up to four (4) years in a state prison;[44] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[45]

You can find more information in the Extortion section of the Kann California Law Group's website. Feel free to contact the Kann California Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County. Your call will go directly to a lawyer – and that is always guaranteed.

California Criminal Jury Instructions - Extortion

To convict you under §518(a), the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You threatened another person or that person's property, intending to obtain the person's consent to give you money or property, or to do an official act. As a result, the other person consented. Finally, the other person gave you money or property or did an official act.

 

Example: Defendant Davon has sexually explicit pictures of Victim Vonnie, his ex-girlfriend. He threatens to reveal these to friends unless Vonnie provides him with more explicit pictures. She sends photos. However, Vonnie soon overcomes her fear and goes to police. Having been arrested and charged under §518(a), Davon defends himself by pointing out that he did not ask for money. Should he be acquitted?

Conclusion: Davon made a threat that was legally sufficient to cause Vonnie fear.[46] She consented to providing photos because of Davon's threat. Then she provided them. These are the elements of the crime. Davon didn't have to ask Vonnie for money to violate the law. Demanding Vonnie provide him with property – in the form of photographs – is also illegal under §518(a). Davon should be convicted.

What Can I Do If I'm Charged With Shoplifting?

The State of California regards Shoplifting as a serious offense. If you're charged with Shoplifting, it's essential that you retain a skilled, dedicated criminal defense attorney as soon as possible. Your rights, freedom, and livelihood are at stake.

Remember, a professional criminal defense attorney may be able to:

  • Negotiate a lesser charge in a plea bargain;
  • Reduce your sentence;
  • Or even get charges dismissed completely.

The attorneys at the Kann California Law Group have an excellent understanding of the local courts and an extensive knowledge of California's criminal justice system. We can represent you in Ventura, Santa Clarita, Los Angeles, Encino, Pasadena and many other Southern California cities. 

If you or someone you know has been arrested for, or charged with, Shoplifting, our attorneys will analyze the facts of your case and plan a strategy that will help you obtain the best possible outcome.

Contact the Kann California Law Group today to schedule your free and confidential consultation. 

References

[1] See California Penal Code [CPC] §459.5(a).

[2]  See CPC §667 (e) (2) (a) (ii).

[3] “A person enters a structure if some part of his or her body or some object under his or her control penetrates the area inside the structure's outer boundary. [¶] A structure's outer boundary includes the area inside a window screen.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1703 (CALCRIM) (2020).

[4] See CPC §18 (a).

[5] See CPC §672.

[6] See CPC §19.

[7] “Three Strikes” enhancement is possible for persons who committed crimes punished under CPC §§667 (e) (2) (c) (1) – (4) or Section 290 (c) of the state Penal Code. See CPC §459.5 (a).

[8] See “Wobbler Law and Legal Definition” at USLegal.com.

[9] See Endnote 4.

[10] See Endnote 5.

[11] See Endnote 6.

[12] See Endnote 2.

[13] See CPC §484 (a).

[14] See “Stay Law and Legal Definition” at USLegal.com.

[15] See Endnote 6.

[16] See Endnote 8.

[17] See Endnote 4.

[18] See Endnote 5.

[19] See Endnote 8.

[20] See CPC §1170 (h). [Version (Amended (as amended by Stats. 2018, Ch. 1001, Sec. 2) by Stats. 2020, Ch. 29, Sec. 15.)]

[21] See Endnote 5.

[22] See Endnote 8.

[23] See CPC §489 (a).

[24] See CPC §489 (c) (1).

[25] See CPC §1192.7 (c) (26).

[26] See Endnote 2.

[27] See CPC §1192.7 (c) (19).

[28] See CPC §667.5 (c) (9).

[29] See Endnote 2.

[30] See CPC §213 (a) (1) (A).

[31] See Endnote 5.

[32] See CPC §425.

[33] See CPC §424 (a).

[34] See Endnote 5.

[35] See Endnote 30.

[36] See Endnote 8.

[37] See CPC §461 (a).

[38] See Endnote 5.

[39] See CPC §487 (a).

[40] See Endnote 8.

[41] See CPC §473 (a).

[42] See Endnote 5.

[43] See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1830 (CALCRIM) (2020).

[44] See CPC §520.

[45] See Endnote 5.

[46] See CPC §519.

Menu