Criminal Lawyers in Theft Defence

The crime of theft, regulated in Articles 234 to 236 of the Criminal Code, consists of taking another's movable property without owner consent, with intent to profit, but without using force on things or violence or intimidation on people.

The big difference with robbery is precisely the absence of force and violence. That's why penalties are significantly lower: from fines (in minor thefts) to 6-18 months prison (in common thefts).

Key Difference: Theft vs Robbery

It's the most important border in property crimes:

• Theft: You take something without permission. Enter through open door, take objects from shelves, take from careless bags. Don't break anything or threaten anyone.
• Robbery: Besides taking, you use force (breaking, climbing, false keys) or violence/intimidation (snatching, threats). Penalties are much higher.

Crucial defence strategy: In many robbery cases, we manage to downgrade classification to theft by demonstrating there was no "typical force". This can go from 1-3 years prison to fine or suspended sentence.

The €400 Barrier: Minor Offence vs Common Crime

The 2015 Reform introduced a capital distinction based on amount:

• Value up to €400: It's a minor offence. Penalty: fine of 1 to 3 months. The conviction creates a criminal record, which can be cancelled 6 months after the penalty is extinguished and does not count towards recidivism except for repeat offending (Arts. 22.8, 136.1 and 234.2 CP).
• Value over €400: It's common theft. Penalty: 6 to 18 months prison. Can be avoided with suspension if first offence.

Our expert work: We dispute valuation of stolen goods. If prosecution says €450 and we prove it's worth €380, we go from prison to fine. Appraisal of value is fundamental.

Theft of Special Gravity (Art. 235 CP)

There's an aggravated subtype punished with 1 to 3 years in prison. Among the cases listed in Art. 235.1 CP, it applies when:

1. Basic necessities: only where the theft causes a shortage (Art. 235.1.2 CP).
2. Serious harm: particular seriousness owing to the value of the goods taken or harm of special significance (Art. 235.1.5 CP), or leaving the victim or their family in serious financial hardship (Art. 235.1.6 CP), as when a self-employed worker's tools are taken.
3. Artistic/historical heritage: Stealing artworks, cataloged goods, archaeological objects.
4. Multi-recidivism: at least three prior final convictions for less serious or serious offences under this Title and of the same nature, with no time limit (Art. 235.1.7 CP).
5. Mobile phones: since Organic Law 1/2026, whatever their value, except phones on sale, in storage or on display in a shop (Art. 235.1.10 CP).

Defence: We question application of this aggravating circumstance. We demonstrate good wasn't necessity, harm wasn't so serious, or prior convictions had been cancelled or should have been (Art. 136 CP).

The Mitigating Circumstance of Damage Repair (Art. 21.5 CP)

Returning stolen goods or paying their value before the trial is the mitigating circumstance of damage repair. As an ordinary mitigating circumstance it puts the penalty in its lower half; if the court treats it as highly qualified, it allows a reduction of one or two degrees (Art. 66.1 CP):

• 18-month theft → can drop to 12 months → sentence suspension.
• Combined with a plea agreement, it helps to obtain a lower sentence and its suspension, but it does not avoid a criminal record: a judgment entered by plea agreement is a conviction.

Practical Advice: Our firm immediately manages judicial consignment of amount. In many cases, this quick action makes the difference between prison and freedom.

Technical Defence Strategies

Each theft case has particularities that allow specific defence lines:

• Lack of Intent: Forgot to pay due to distraction. Were going to do it at another checkout. No "intent to appropriate".
• Type Error: Genuinely believed object belonged to you or that you had permission.
• Mistaken Identity: We challenge irregular lineups, low-quality recordings, unreliable witnesses.
• Consent: Owner authorized you to take thing (even if later denies it).
• State of Necessity: Hunger theft (stealing food due to extreme hunger). Exempt if real need is proven.

Advanced Procedural Strategies

Beyond substantive defence, we apply procedural techniques that change outcome:

• Rewarded Plea: In a fast-track trial, pleading guilty before the duty judge (juez de guardia; formerly the duty court, Juzgado de Guardia) reduces the penalty by a third (Art. 801 LECrim). Combined with returning the stolen goods, it can be very advantageous.
• Sentence Suspension: If penalty is ≤ 2 years and it's your first offence, you can avoid prison with community service or conduct rules.
• Statute of Limitations: Minor theft becomes time-barred after one year (Art. 131.1 CP). If proceedings have not been directed against you within that period, the offence is time-barred (Art. 132.2 CP).
• Criminal Mediation: In minor thefts, reaching agreement with victim (return + apology) can avoid penalty.