Theft Crime Defense in Orange County — Petty Theft to Grand Theft.
A theft conviction can follow you in every job application, every background check, and every professional license review. Jimmy defends shoplifting, burglary, robbery, embezzlement, and identity theft cases across Orange County — personally, from the first call to the final outcome.
Free · Confidential · Direct Attorney Response · 24/7
What You’re Actually Charged With
California theft law covers a wide range of conduct. The charge and the amount determine what you’re facing.
Theft charges in California range from infractions to serious felonies — and the line between them often turns on a single dollar amount or a single element of the alleged conduct. Understanding exactly what charge is on the table is where every theft defense starts.
Penal Code 484 — Petty Theft
Theft of property valued at $950 or less. A misdemeanor under Proposition 47 for most defendants, carrying up to six months in county jail and a fine. Repeat petty theft with a prior theft conviction can be charged as a felony under PC 666 — the so-called petty theft with a prior. The employment consequences of even a misdemeanor theft conviction are significant and often outlast the legal penalty.
Penal Code 487 — Grand Theft
Theft of property valued at more than $950, theft of a firearm, or theft of certain agricultural products regardless of value. Grand theft is a wobbler — it can be charged as either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the circumstances and the prosecutor’s discretion. Felony grand theft carries up to three years in state prison.
Penal Code 459 — Burglary
Entry into a structure with the intent to commit a theft or felony inside. First-degree burglary — entry into a residence — is always a felony and a strike offense under California’s Three Strikes law. Second-degree burglary — entry into a commercial building — is a wobbler. The entry itself is the crime; the theft does not need to be completed for a burglary charge to hold.
Penal Code 211 — Robbery
Taking property from another person by force or fear. Robbery is always a felony and always a strike offense. First-degree robbery — committed in a residence, on public transit, or against certain victims — carries three to nine years in state prison. The use of force or fear is what separates robbery from theft, and that distinction is often contested in the facts.
Penal Code 503 — Embezzlement
Fraudulent appropriation of property by a person entrusted with it — typically an employee taking from an employer, or a fiduciary misappropriating client funds. The amount determines whether embezzlement is charged as petty theft or grand theft. Embezzlement cases often involve complex financial records and a lengthy investigation before charges are filed.
Penal Code 530.5 — Identity Theft
Willful use of another person’s personal identifying information for unlawful purposes. Identity theft is a wobbler — misdemeanor or felony depending on the facts and amount involved. It carries additional civil liability and can trigger federal charges when the conduct crosses state lines or involves financial institutions.
Proposition 47 and Theft
Prop 47 reduced many theft-related felonies to misdemeanors where the value of the stolen property is $950 or less. This applies to new charges and, through a petition process, to prior felony convictions that would now qualify as misdemeanors under the new threshold. If you have an older felony theft conviction involving property valued under $950, it may be reducible.
The Defense
Theft charges require specific intent. That requirement creates real defense opportunities.
Most California theft offenses require the prosecution to prove specific criminal intent — the intent to permanently deprive the owner of their property. That element of proof creates meaningful defense options that do not exist for strict-liability offenses.
Lack of Intent
Theft requires specific intent to steal. Mistakes, misunderstandings, and disputed transactions do not satisfy that requirement. A person who genuinely believed they had permission to take or use the property, or who intended to return it, did not form the intent required for theft. These defenses turn on the specific facts and often on how the prosecution’s evidence holds up under cross-examination.
Claim of Right
California law recognizes a claim of right defense — the good-faith belief that the property taken actually belongs to you, or that you had a legitimate legal right to it. A genuine claim of right, even if ultimately mistaken, negates the criminal intent required for theft. This defense is most commonly available in disputes over property, loans, or business relationships where ownership is genuinely contested.
Mistaken Identity
Retail theft and burglary cases frequently involve surveillance footage, eyewitness identifications, and circumstantial evidence. Eyewitness identification is among the least reliable forms of evidence in criminal law — and surveillance footage quality, angle, and lighting all affect how definitive any identification actually is. Jimmy examines identification evidence carefully on every theft case.
Civil Compromise — Penal Code 1377-1378
California law allows certain misdemeanor theft cases to be resolved through civil compromise — the victim is compensated and, with the court’s approval, the criminal case is dismissed. Civil compromise is an underutilized resolution that most defendants have never heard of. It is not available for all theft cases or all defendants, but where it applies it is one of the most favorable outcomes available. Jimmy evaluates civil compromise eligibility on every qualifying misdemeanor theft case.
Restitution-Based Dispositions
In cases where a civil compromise is not available or the prosecution will not agree to dismissal, a restitution-focused negotiated plea can minimize criminal consequences while addressing the victim’s financial loss. This approach is particularly effective in embezzlement and identity theft cases where the harm is primarily financial.
Diversion Eligibility
First-time and low-level theft defendants may qualify for diversion under Penal Code 1001.95 or other diversion programs. Successful completion results in dismissal of the charge. Diversion availability depends on the charge, the defendant’s history, and the specific court — Jimmy assesses diversion eligibility as a first step on every qualifying case.
Free Case Evaluation
A theft conviction has a long reach. Talk to Jimmy before it goes any further.
The employment consequences of a theft conviction — particularly for white-collar theft, embezzlement, and identity theft — often matter more to clients than the immediate criminal penalty. Background checks flag theft convictions prominently. Professional licenses are denied or revoked. The earlier a defense attorney is involved, the more options exist to keep a conviction off the record entirely. Free case evaluation. Jimmy answers personally — call or text, 24 hours a day.
Free Case Evaluation · Confidential · Direct Attorney Response · 24/7