Theft Charges in Tennessee

Tennessee’s theft statutes cover a wide range of conduct under a single framework — from shoplifting a small item to the misappropriation of substantial sums from an employer. What matters for the grading of the charge, and for most of the consequences, is the value of what was taken. What matters for the defense is often what the State can actually prove about intent, control, and the relationship between the accused and the property. Brooks Law Firm represents clients facing theft and property crime charges in Shelby County and the surrounding area.

“A theft charge is not just a question of whether something was taken. It is a question of intent, authority, and value — and each of those can be contested.”

How Tennessee Classifies Theft

Tennessee consolidates most property-taking offenses under the general theft statute, Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-103, which defines theft as knowingly obtaining or exercising control over property without the owner’s effective consent and with intent to deprive the owner of the property. The grading of the offense is set by Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-105 based on the value of the property taken:

  • Property valued at $1,000 or less — Class A misdemeanor (up to 11 months 29 days).
  • Property valued more than $1,000 but not more than $2,500 — Class E felony (1 to 6 years).
  • Property valued more than $2,500 but not more than $10,000 — Class D felony (2 to 12 years).
  • Property valued more than $10,000 but not more than $60,000 — Class C felony (3 to 15 years).
  • Property valued more than $60,000 but not more than $250,000 — Class B felony (8 to 30 years).
  • Property valued more than $250,000 — Class A felony (15 to 60 years).

These thresholds reflect amendments effective in 2017 and subsequent technical corrections. The specific value actually proven at trial — not the value alleged in the charging instrument — determines the classification.

Specific Theft Offenses We Handle

Shoplifting

Theft of merchandise from a retail establishment, charged under the general theft statute. The value threshold controls the grading, and “retail theft” provisions in § 39-14-146 provide specific definitions and evidentiary rules.

Employee Theft & Embezzlement

Theft from an employer, ranging from a cash register shortage to large-scale misappropriation. Often accompanied by civil demands under Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-144 and restitution orders that follow any conviction.

Burglary & Aggravated Burglary — §§ 39-13-1001 to 1004

Entering a building or habitation with intent to commit theft or another felony. Aggravated burglary of a habitation is a Class C felony; especially aggravated burglary is a Class B felony.

Robbery & Aggravated Robbery — §§ 39-13-401, 402

Theft by violence or putting the person in fear. Robbery is a Class C felony; aggravated robbery (with a deadly weapon or serious injury) is a Class B felony; especially aggravated robbery is a Class A felony with significant mandatory sentencing.

Identity Theft — § 39-14-150

Obtaining, possessing, or using another person’s identifying information without authorization. Graded by the value of benefit obtained or loss caused, up to Class B felony.

Fraudulent Use of a Credit or Debit Card — § 39-14-118

Using a credit or debit card with intent to defraud. Graded by the value of the property, services, or money obtained.

Worthless Checks — § 39-14-121

Issuing or passing a worthless check with intent to defraud. Graded by the face value of the check or the aggregate amount in a common scheme.

Vandalism — § 39-14-408

Knowingly causing damage to or destruction of property. Graded by the amount of damage caused under the same value thresholds used for theft.

Theft of Services — § 39-14-104

Obtaining services by deception, threat, or diversion, where the defendant knows the services are available only for compensation. Graded by the value of the services.

Defenses Commonly Litigated

  • Lack of intent to deprive — theft requires both knowing control and the specific intent to deprive the owner. Cases involving borrowed property, mistaken ownership, or civil disputes often fail on this element.
  • Effective consent — whether the owner authorized the taking or use of the property, a question that arises frequently in employment and family disputes.
  • Value disputes — a value miscalculation can reduce the charge by one or more classifications, often the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony.
  • Mistaken identity — particularly in shoplifting cases built on video surveillance of uncertain quality.
  • Fourth Amendment challenges — evidence recovered during unlawful searches and seizures.
  • Civil-dispute reframing — cases where the underlying facts are essentially contractual and do not support criminal charges.

Collateral Consequences

A theft conviction carries consequences beyond sentence and fine:

  • Employment — many positions, particularly those involving handling money or fiduciary duties, are closed to a person with a theft conviction.
  • Professional licensing — theft and dishonesty convictions affect licensing boards for a wide range of professions.
  • Immigration — theft offenses are often classified as crimes involving moral turpitude, with significant immigration consequences.
  • Expungement — many theft convictions are eligible for expungement after the required waiting period (see our expungement page), but eligibility depends on the specific subsection and classification.
  • Civil demand — under Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-144, retailers may demand civil damages in shoplifting cases independent of the criminal charge.

Where These Cases Are Heard

  • General Sessions Court of Shelby County — for misdemeanor thefts and preliminary hearings on felony thefts.
  • Criminal Court of Shelby County — for felony thefts after indictment.
  • Juvenile Court — where the accused is a minor.

Working With Brooks Law Firm

Many theft cases turn on small facts — a receipt, a text message, a business record, the relationship between the accused and the owner — that can change the case dramatically. We work with clients to identify those facts early, understand what the State can actually prove, and — where appropriate — negotiate resolutions that preserve eligibility for diversion and expungement. Spanish-language services are available.