Skip to content

Theft Lawyer Shoplifting Cart 228

Shoplifting Attorney Minneapolis MN

CASE LAW UPDATE:  Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain conviction for theft?

Defendant was convicted of shoplifting theft.  Retail stores have theft personnel who watch the store via video surveillance.  These theft personnel become quite expert as to the methods people use to steal merchandise.  They can often predict the behavior.  In Minnesota, generally, for theft, there is misdemeanor, gross misdemeanor, and felony level theft.  The level is determined by the value of the items stolen  The evidence in the instant case was that he removed several items from a retail store without paying for them.  Defendant contended that he did not commit a crime by temporarily leaving his cart, which contained unpaid for items, near the customer service area and the exit, while he spoke with customer service employees.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction of shoplifting theft, noting that the inference that defendant intended to purchase the unpaid for items in his cart after putting the items he paid for back in his vehicle was not a reasonable inference in light of the evidence that defendant and another who attempted to  leave the store with the cart coordinated a hand off of the cart.  Conviction affirmed.

State v. Quaas, A19-2076, Beltrami County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

Contact Lynne Torgerson

Contact Us

Recent Posts