People v. Thompson
158 Cal. App. 2d 320, 322 P.2d 489, 1958 Cal. App. LEXIS 2371 (1958)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The crime of theft by larceny is complete when a person carries property past the last point of sale within a store with the specific intent to permanently deprive the owner of it, even if the person is apprehended before physically exiting the premises.
Facts:
- David L. Thompson entered a Thrifty Drug Store and selected seven phonograph records from a display rack.
- David concealed the records inside his coat and walked past the store's checkout stand without paying for them.
- Immediately after, his brother, Charles Jesse Thompson, selected eight phonograph records from the same display.
- Charles also concealed the records inside his coat and walked past the checkout stand without making payment.
- A store employee, Ross L. Childers, stopped both brothers after they had passed the checkout area but while they were still inside the store.
- After being apprehended, Charles offered to pay for the records and later attempted to escape.
- When questioned by Childers, both brothers admitted they took the records for their own use.
Procedural Posture:
- The State of California filed informations charging Charles Jesse Thompson and David L. Thompson separately with petty theft with a prior conviction.
- The defendants pleaded not guilty, and the cases were submitted to the trial court on the transcript of the preliminary hearing.
- The trial court found both defendants guilty as charged.
- The court sentenced each defendant to one year in the county jail.
- The defendants (appellants) appealed their judgments of conviction to the intermediate appellate court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a person commit the crime of theft by concealing merchandise and carrying it past a store's checkout stand without paying, even if they are apprehended before leaving the store?
Opinions:
Majority - Shinn, P. J.
Yes. A person commits the crime of theft by concealing merchandise and carrying it past the checkout stand without paying, even if apprehended before leaving the store. The offense of theft requires an unlawful taking and asportation with the intent to deprive the owner of the property. The court found that all elements were established by the evidence. The act of carrying the records past the checkout stand constituted asportation, as this act effectively removed the items from the store's possession and control, even if only for a moment. The requisite intent to steal could be properly inferred from the defendants' actions, including the concealment of the records, Charles's attempt to escape, and their subsequent admissions. The fact that the defendants were frustrated in their attempt to carry the property away from the store does not negate the completion of the crime.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the asportation (carrying away) element of theft in the context of a modern self-service retail environment. It establishes that the crime is not contingent on the defendant successfully exiting the store with the merchandise. The decision solidifies the legal principle that passing the last point of payment with the requisite intent completes the crime, making it easier for prosecutors to secure convictions for shoplifting. This precedent is significant as it defines the moment of theft's completion within the physical confines of the store, impacting how similar cases are investigated and charged.
