Theft Charges and Intent: What Prosecutors Must Prove
Facing a theft charge in Washington can be overwhelming. Whether it’s shoplifting, identity theft, or embezzlement, being accused of taking someone else’s property without permission is a serious legal matter. But theft cases aren't always cut and dry. One of the most important components in any theft case is intent.
Prosecutors must go beyond proving that an item was taken—they also have to show that the accused intended to permanently deprive the rightful owner of it.
At the Metro Law Firm, I focus exclusively on criminal defense and have worked with many individuals facing theft charges throughout Washington. I understand how prosecutors build their cases, especially when it comes to proving intent—an essential part of any theft allegation.
Whether you're being investigated or have already been charged, I’m here to help you understand your rights and what to expect moving forward. Here, I break down what prosecutors must prove in theft cases, the role of intent, and how it all plays out in Washington.
If you or someone you know is dealing with a theft accusation, understanding these legal concepts can make a real difference in how you approach your criminal defense. Keep reading or contact my staff today for more information.
What to Know About Theft Under Washington Law
In Washington, theft is broadly defined under RCW 9A.56.020 as wrongfully obtaining or exerting unauthorized control over someone else's property or services with the intent to deprive them of it. The law applies to physical goods, money, services, and even intellectual property in some cases.
There are three degrees of theft charges in Washington:
Theft in the first degree: Involves property or services valued over $5,000. It’s a Class B felony.
Theft in the second degree: Applies to property or services valued between $750 and $5,000. It’s a Class C felony.
Theft in the third degree: Involves property or services valued under $750. This is considered a gross misdemeanor.
The penalties vary based on the degree, but they may include jail time, fines, restitution, and a lasting criminal record. This makes a solid criminal defense strategy essential, especially when intent is in question.
Why Intent Matters in Theft Cases
Intent is a crucial element in most criminal cases, but in theft cases, it often becomes the focal point. Prosecutors are tasked with proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused not only took the property but did so with the intention of never returning it or compensating the rightful owner.
Without proving intent, a prosecutor may not be able to secure a conviction. For example, if someone mistakenly took the wrong laptop from a coffee shop, thinking it was theirs, there may not be intent to steal—just a genuine error. This lack of intent can become a key part of an effective criminal defense.
In many cases, the burden of proving intent lies in the prosecutor's ability to present circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence of intent (like a confession) is rare, so prosecutors often rely on behavior, text messages, video footage, or witness testimony to support their claims.
What Prosecutors Must Prove
To convict someone of theft in Washington, the prosecution must establish several key elements:
Unlawful taking: The accused must have taken or exercised control over someone else’s property without permission.
Lack of consent: The rightful owner did not authorize the taking.
Intent to deprive: The accused intended to permanently deprive the owner of the property.
Value of property: The value of the stolen property or services determines the degree of the theft charge.
Each of these elements must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If one of them is lacking—especially intent—then the foundation of the prosecution's case may fall apart.
Common Defenses in Theft Cases
Challenging a theft charge in court often means examining the intent and facts behind the alleged act. Several defenses may be raised depending on the circumstances:
Mistake of fact: Arguing that the accused believed the property was theirs or had permission to take it.
Lack of intent: Demonstrating that there was no intention to permanently keep the property.
Duress or coercion: Showing that the accused was forced or threatened into taking the property.
Return of property: While returning stolen property doesn’t erase the crime, it may suggest that there was no intent to permanently deprive the owner.
Entrapment: In rare cases, a person may argue they were tricked or induced into committing the theft by law enforcement.
Each of these defenses hinges on the specific facts of the case and the ability of the criminal defense attorney to present a compelling argument.
What the Evidence Says About Intent
Because proving intent can be tricky, prosecutors rely heavily on indirect evidence. Here are some types of evidence commonly used to establish intent:
Surveillance footage: Capturing how the property was taken.
Witness testimony: Statements from those who saw the incident or heard incriminating remarks.
Digital evidence: Texts, emails, or social media messages discussing the property.
Behavior after the incident: Attempts to sell the property, flee the area, or hide evidence.
Prior history: Past incidents may be introduced in some cases to establish a pattern, though this is carefully limited by rules of evidence.
While this evidence may help build the prosecution's case, it can also be challenged by a strong criminal defense. For example, surveillance footage may be unclear, or witness accounts may conflict. An experienced criminal defense attorney can work to discredit or explain this evidence.
What Can Influence the Outcome of a Theft Case
Theft charges can carry long-term consequences, including difficulty finding employment, housing, or educational opportunities. That’s why it's important to take theft allegations seriously from the beginning.
A solid criminal defense isn't just about arguing innocence. It's about questioning the state’s evidence, protecting your rights, and making sure the prosecution meets its burden of proof. In many cases, early legal advice can lead to reduced charges, alternative sentencing options, or even dismissal.
The strength of your defense often depends on how early you act and who you turn to for help. An experienced criminal defense attorney can evaluate whether your rights were violated, challenge how intent is being established, and explore every possible legal option available to you. The right guidance early on can make a significant difference in the direction of your case.
Speak With a Criminal Defense Attorney Today
In Washington State, a theft conviction requires more than just proving that property was taken. Prosecutors must also show that the accused had the intent to permanently deprive the rightful owner. This key element of intent is often the deciding factor in court and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
I’ve defended clients across Richland, Washington, Kennewick, Pasco, Seattle, Benton‑Franklin County, Yakima County, and Walla Walla County.
I understand how intent plays a central role in theft cases. I take the time to examine every detail and build a defense tailored to the facts of each situation.
If you’re facing theft charges or have questions about what comes next, reach out to me at the Metro Law Firm today—I’m here to help you take the next step forward with confidence.