Shoplifting, Larceny, Robbery, Theft Felony Robbery!

[and0r]

hi, my friend got charged with felony robbery. he was at a sporting goods store and tried to walk out with a stolen pair of shoes he was wearing on his feet.

at the exit he was approached by a police officer in plain clothes who asked my friend to take a step back by the register, instead my friend tried to flee like a dumbass. he tried to run out the door and was grabbed by the officer and thrown to the ground.

it is absolutely critical that we find a way to bring the charges down to anything that is not a felony.

here are some facts:

my friend never exited the premises. he never even left the store, so i think technically he didn't even steal anything.

he never shoved or pushed the cop or anything, he was only trying to evade by pulling himself out of the officers clutches

the cop was in plain clothing and did not identify himself as a cop at any moment.

everything was caught on camera.

his public attorney is really not helping him with anything. we are desperately looking for a way to bring down the charges. any advice or help will do.

thank you.

 

[bluemann33]

hi, my friend got charged with felony robbery. he was at a sporting goods store and tried to walk out with a stolen pair of shoes he was wearing on his feet.

at the exit he was approached by a police officer in plain clothes who asked my friend to take a step back by the register, instead my friend tried to flee like a dumbass. he tried to run out the door and was grabbed by the officer and thrown to the ground.

it is absolutely critical that we find a way to bring the charges down to anything that is not a felony.

here are some facts:

my friend never exited the premises. he never even left the store, so i think technically he didn't even steal anything.

he never shoved or pushed the cop or anything, he was only trying to evade by pulling himself out of the officers clutches

the cop was in plain clothing and did not identify himself as a cop at any moment.

everything was caught on camera.

his public attorney is really not helping him with anything. we are desperately looking for a way to bring down the charges. any advice or help will do.

thank you.

He technically did steal something. Just because He did not make it out of the store does not mean he didnt steal it in the laws eyes. His public defender can hopefully get a plea down to lesser charges, depending on how much the item was, his age criminal history etc. Good luck to him.

 

[and0r]

He technically did steal something. Just because He did not make it out of the store does not mean he didnt steal it in the laws eyes. His public defender can hopefully get a plea down to lesser charges, depending on how much the item was, his age criminal history etc. Good luck to him.

yes, but what makes felony robbery?
is it because he tried to run? shouldn't it be a misdemeanor theft?
the shoes cost 60$

 

[jacksgal]

Before I address your "facts" let me tell you that there are numerous things that could make this a felony, running was one. He should talk to an Attorney as soon as possible. With this being a felony charge diversion may not be an option.
Your facts:



my friend never exited the premises. he never even left the store, so i think technically he didn't even steal anything.
Yes he did if he passed the last point of sale that was enough

he never shoved or pushed the cop or anything, he was only trying to evade by pulling himself out of the officers clutches
That is enough to make it strong arm robbery a felony!

the cop was in plain clothing and did not identify himself as a cop at any moment.
So

everything was caught on camera.
Which helps store not your friend

his public attorney is really not helping him with anything. we are desperately looking for a way to bring down the charges. any advice or help will do.
Many Attorneys offer free consultations. He should get as many as he can. In mean time ther eis a link in my signature line. It will take you to a forum just for these issues. The experts there may have additional advice

 

[and0r]

Before I address your "facts" let me tell you that there are numerous things that could make this a felony, running was one. He should talk to an Attorney as soon as possible. With this being a felony charge diversion may not be an option.
Your facts:



my friend never exited the premises. he never even left the store, so i think technically he didn't even steal anything.
Yes he did if he passed the last point of sale that was enough

he never shoved or pushed the cop or anything, he was only trying to evade by pulling himself out of the officers clutches
That is enough to make it strong arm robbery a felony!

the cop was in plain clothing and did not identify himself as a cop at any moment.
So

everything was caught on camera.
Which helps store not your friend

his public attorney is really not helping him with anything. we are desperately looking for a way to bring down the charges. any advice or help will do.
Many Attorneys offer free consultations. He should get as many as he can. In mean time ther eis a link in my signature line. It will take you to a forum just for these issues. The experts there may have additional advice

the fact that he tried to evade capture from a police officer makes it a felony? or just evading anything makes it a felony? please be specific.

also, i was not implying the camera footage was something beneficial.

anyway, im only looking for quality advice, without the "free" consultation legal spin. i need unbiased assistance from people not trying to make a buck off me.

 

[jacksgal]

Then use the site I gave you but I can tell you they too will suggest he talk to an Attorney along with their expert advice

 

[fredrikklaw]

"Felony Robbery" is a redundant phrase since all robberies are classed as felonies and the reason "your friend" is being charged with robbery instead of petit larceny -or shoplifting with a value of less than $400- has to do with the black letter law definitions of larceny and robbery.

You are right of course; "your friend" had not left the store when he was approached by the plain clothes officer and had he just complied with the directive and gone back to the register, he would have been charged with a misdemeanor petit larceny at worst, if not merely cited and released, as most stores tend to treat petty shopliftings these days. But instead, he elected to make a run for it and was grabbed by the plain clothes officer and the moment he tried to use force to struggle to free himself from the officer's clutches, the simple shoplifting became a robbery which is where the black letter law definitions come in.

Where larceny is defined (in parts) as the [unlawful] secret or silent taking of the property of another, felony is defined (in parts) as the direct taking of the property of another with force, threat, or intimidation. And the fact that the plain clothes officer "did not identify himself" makes not a bit of difference in the overall scheme of this matter. And that is because of the privilege of making a citizen's arrest afforded to every citizen of this state by the authority of the California's Penal Code.

So, the person later identified as a police officer who was in plain clothes did not have to identify himself at all as the approach could have been made by good ol' Uncle Joe or little Miss Maple from up the street who witnessed "your friend" committing the offense and acted accordingly.

As for a way to bring down the charges, well, that is entirely in the hands of the District Attorney and dependant on the shrewdness of the Public Defender and "your friend's" past criminal history. But if I were to hazard a guess considering this was "your friend's" first such indiscretion, then I would say THE WORST case scenario would be that the felony charge sticks with (at least) a 3-Year jail sentence suspended in favor of a 3-Year summary probation.

Also, "your friend" can always file a motion after the judgment is passed to "Modify" the sentence; i.e. knock the felony down to a misdemeanor.

fredrikklaw

 

[and0r]

"my friend" is in jail right now at wayside.
im just trying to get some legal facts and see what his options are, as his attorney is doing absolutely nothing.

he has no money for bail or an attorney. he really is in jail.
anyways, i guess he's at the mercy of the court.

 

[army judge]

Robbery is defined as the taking of the property of another against their will by means of force or threat of force.

That is obviously not what happened in the instant matter.

How did shoplifting go from a property crime, to a violent felony?

It couldn't, and it didn't!

California has no charge titled, "felony robbery".

California does have a "felony petty theft" or "petty with a prior" charge, for a person that has been convicted of a previous theft charge!

Let's dissect this alleged event.

California law sets theft crimes into two categories, grand theft and petty theft. Prosecutors must prove that the value of the property allegedly stolen exceeds $400 in order to file felony theft charges. An exception would be the theft of a gun or theft of something on the person of the victim. This would escalate the act to felony grand theft regardless of the value of the item.

Most other thefts are petty thefts. If the value of the stolen item is less than $50.00 prosecutors often choose to charge you with an infraction, a non-criminal offense that carries a monetary penalty.

If you have any prior convictions for theft and find yourself to be charged with petty theft again, you can (and often will be) charged with a felony that is called a "petty with a prior". This violation of the penal code section 666. If you're convicted of felony petty theft, you face a felony punishment, a year in jail or three years in prison!

Your "friend", must have a been to the rodeo one or two other times. The police have charged him with "petty with a prior" in this case, not because he attempted to flee, or even for any attack on someone else. But, because he has one or MORE prior theft convictions.

There are many red herrings in your recitation of the events. This isn't a rap or a knock on you, OP. They, no doubt appear because your friend told his version of these events.

In law school I had a criminal law professor, who always admonished us to avoid red herrings. So, you're wondering, what the heck is a red herring? Well, it isn't the smoked fish of UK gastronomic fame.

A red herring is an illogical issue, whether legal or factual, argued or presented in a case or on a law school exam. Red herrings are often told to distract one's attention from the truth or diminish the significance of someone's involvement in an event.

 

[jacksgal]

My husband worked Loss Prevention and ran his stores Office. He was stopping a shoplifter who bit his hand and fled. The young thief was then charged by Police with "strong arm robbery" This is somewhat similar to the Op's case. Since he is only "the friend" and not likely present we do not know the circumstances of the event.


Side note: He did not draw blood and he (the thief) came out of that scuffle worst off than my husband :yes:

 

[CdwJava]

hi, my friend got charged with felony robbery. he was at a sporting goods store and tried to walk out with a stolen pair of shoes he was wearing on his feet.

at the exit he was approached by a police officer in plain clothes who asked my friend to take a step back by the register, instead my friend tried to flee like a dumbass. he tried to run out the door and was grabbed by the officer and thrown to the ground.

If he was charged with robbery pursuant to PC 211 than he had to utilize force or fear in an attempt to flee with the goods. So, he either fought with the officer (more than simply trying to run) or he presented a weapon. Otherwise, he might have been charged with burglary or theft (shoplifting).

If charged for PC 211 then he is alleged to have fought to get away with the goods.

it is absolutely critical that we find a way to bring the charges down to anything that is not a felony.

That's the attorney's job - not yours. His attorney can work out a plea deal, you cannot.

my friend never exited the premises. he never even left the store, so i think technically he didn't even steal anything.

One does not have to actually leave the property to be guilty of theft or even robbery. He had the items concealed on his person and was apparently headed for the door - that's sufficient in CA.

he never shoved or pushed the cop or anything, he was only trying to evade by pulling himself out of the officers clutches

Apparently the officer's account was different or he would not have been charged for robbery. Unless the officer messed up and charged for the offense and he should not have. But, if your friend has been arraigned on the charge of 211 apparently there is sufficient grounds for a DA and a judge to believe that there is probable cause for the offense to be alleged.

the cop was in plain clothing and did not identify himself as a cop at any moment.

That still does not mean he has a right to run or fight to depart with stolen property. What it MIGHT do is prevent a charge of resisting or obstructing a peace officer.

everything was caught on camera.

Bad for him as he will almost certainly be found guilty of something. It sounds like he needs to work out a plea deal quick!

his public attorney is really not helping him with anything. we are desperately looking for a way to bring down the charges. any advice or help will do.

What do you expect his attorney to do? Looking busy is something an attorney does when he gets paid by the hour - even if it is ineffective. If he has been arraigned, then they have to wait for the preliminary hearing. There may not be a lot he can do prior to the prelim, so it's probably not that he is not doing anything it may well be that there is nothing really to do just yet.

 

[jharris352]

I would say the attorney may not be doing what you think he should be doing, but then again, you don't know what he should be doing. Court appointed attorneys love to get a plea deal. Sit back and relax best you can. Maybe ask the attorney to get your friend a bond hearing and try to get him out of jail. Past that, the attorney will present a plea when he can work one out. Lesson: Don't steal, and certainly don't run. You seem to understand that, when your friend gets out so will he. Good luck.

 

[mightymoose]

First, it is not robbery in any form. Robbery is a crime against the person, which is not the case here.
This is a property crime.
If he was charged with a felony then it was most likely PC 459, burglary. In California, if it can be proven that you entered the building with the intent to commit theft or any felony within, then it is a burglary (regardless of the value of the theft).
Most likely there is no evidence that supports his intent at the time he entered unless he was dumb enough to make a statement to that fact. Without sufficient evidence showing intent to commit theft at the time of entry the charge will most certainly be reduced to petty theft, a misdemeanor.
Attempting to flee did not necessarily add any charges... it just shows guilt. I highly doubt the "officer" was anything more than a security guard or loss prevention employee, but even so, if it was not a uniformed police officer detaining him then he was free to walk away (or run) at any time.
Also, as was already said, leaving the building is not necessary to complete the crime. Simply putting an item in your pocket or otherwise concealing it is sufficient. In this case, when he put the shoes on and walked away wearing them ( a bit more then a quick stroll down the aisle to see how they feel) he completed the theft. Most likely he also stashed the box with the shoes he wore into the store, further showing his intent.

His best defense is to argue that while shopping he realized he didn't have enough money, and while in the store he had a weak moment and foolishly tried to take the shoes. If he hasn't made statements about entering the store with intent to try to steal something, THEN DON'T! This should easily be shaken down to a misdemeanor with probation and fines.

 

[mightymoose]

My husband worked Loss Prevention and ran his stores Office. He was stopping a shoplifter who bit his hand and fled. The young thief was then charged by Police with "strong arm robbery" This is somewhat similar to the Op's case. Since he is only "the friend" and not likely present we do not know the circumstances of the event.


Side note: He did not draw blood and he (the thief) came out of that scuffle worst off than my husband :yes:

As you know, state laws vary.
In California this is a clear case of burglary (assuming he entered the building with intent to commit theft). Otherwise, it is petty theft.
A confrontation with a security officer would not change the crime to a strongarm robbery (since the property was not taken from anyone by means of force or fear). At most, it would add an additional charge of battery, which could be prosecuted as a felony if there was significant injury.

 

[jacksgal]

:dgrin The only injury was to the lifter. My husband did not take too kindly to being bit. He took him to the hard mall floor hard and held him until backup arrived. Why they charged him (originally) with strong arm robbery I hav eno clue. My husband never cared too much about the charge. His job was to protect store merchandise.

 

[CdwJava]

If the suspect were in possession of the property and actively fought to flee with the property (as opposed to simply struggling to free himself) he could be charged with robbery per PC 211. If all he did was try to pull away then PC 211 should not apply. If the suspect swung on or kicked at the officer, security guard, employee, or passerby, then the elements of the offense are minimally met - certainly sufficient for an arrest and booking on 211.

From CPOLS published by the CA Attorney General:

"Robbery is the felonious taking of personal property in the possession of another, from his person or immediate presence, and against his will, accomplished by means of force or fear."

It will constitute robbery if "force or fear" is used either to gain possession of the property or to maintain possession.

In other words, simple theft can turn into a robbery if the suspect resorts to the use of force or fear while carrying away the loot. (Pham (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 61, 65; Miller (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 216, 224.)​

 

[mightymoose]

CDW- It wouldn't be a 211 unless the suspect took the property from the person. In this case the suspect was wearing the shoes and did not take them from anyone- rather from the shelf. That makes it a property crime, not a crime against the person.

The struggling/fighting is only a battery at best, and if this was a private security or loss prevention officer then they shouldn't have been grabbing the guy in the first place.

The example you use here would apply to a pickpocket... a theft from the person with no force/fear, however the person discovers the act and engages in a struggle with the thief. There we have a use of force to maintain possession of an item stolen from the person... that makes a 211.

 

[army judge]

I gave you guys the answer.
It is "petty with a prior" or "felony petty theft".
This is done at the prosecutor's discretion.
The perp isn't smart enough to know what it was called.
But, he knows he's being charged with a felony!
I love the way the legislature numbered this one!!!

California Penal Code Section 666
Every person who, having been convicted of petty theft, grand
theft, auto theft under Section 10851 of the Vehicle Code, burglary, carjacking, robbery, or a felony violation of Section 496 and having served a term therefor in any penal institution or having been imprisoned therein as a condition of probation for that offense, is subsequently convicted of petty theft, then the person convicted of that subsequent offense is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or in the state prison.
Last modified: March 8, 2010

http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/666.html

Under California Penal Code Section 666, two or more offenses of petty theft may be charged as felony petty theft. Convictions for repeated petty theft offenders may include state prison sentences of up to 16 months.

Petty theft with a prior, also known as felony petty theft, makes it possible for someone convicted of a minor shoplifting crime to be charged with a felony if the person had been convicted of any theft-related offense at any time in the past. If the person so charged has two previous felony convictions, this in turn can result in a 25 years to life sentence under California's Three Strikes Law (a.k.a. "Three Strikes, and You're Out").

http://searchwarp.com/swa67610.htm

 

[jacksgal]

Its very likely as AJ says furthermore since this is "The Friend" not the perp we do not know all the circumstances of the incident

 

[CdwJava]

CDW- It wouldn't be a 211 unless the suspect took the property from the person. In this case the suspect was wearing the shoes and did not take them from anyone- rather from the shelf. That makes it a property crime, not a crime against the person.

No, he stole the property from the business. If he used force to escape with the goods, it could be charged as PC 211.

Robbery does NOT require the property first be taken from the immediate possession of a person.

Note that this is even included in the Jury Instructions from Calcrim:

[A (store/ [or] business) (employee/ <insert
description>) may be robbed if property of the (store/ [or]
business) is taken, even though he or she does not own the
property and was not, at that moment, in immediate physical
control of the property. If the facts show that the (employee/
<insert description>) was a representative of the
owner of the property and the (employee/ <insert
description>) expressly or implicitly had authority over the
property, then that (employee/ <insert description>)
may be robbed if property of the (store/ [or] business) is taken by
force or fear.]​

A further discussion on 211 can be found in sections 13.32b-d of CPOLS.

I have investigated and prosecuted a number of cases just like this. The argument comes down to the use of force ... was the "force" simply an effort to run (which is NOT 211) or was the "force" used to maintain control of the property while actively threatening or taking offensive action against the employee or representative.

As for PC666 that would require a prior conviction with some jail time sentenced for that section to kick in. If there is a prior for the suspect, then it might be a viable option for him to plea down to.

I strongly suspect that ROBBERY is not the charge, but as previously mentioned, he has been charged with burglary. But, it really depends on what kind of force he is alleged to have used in an attempt to flee and whether it was to further the flight, or offensive action against the person attempting to detain him.