Stealing and Robbery Lawyers Parramatta

Larceny (stealing) under s117 of the Crimes Act 1900 carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment. That's the headline figure, but the real sentencing range for stealing in NSW stretches from no conviction at all to years behind bars, depending entirely on the circumstances and how the matter is handled.

For a first offence shoplifting charge with no prior record, a Section 10 dismissal under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 is a realistic outcome. The charge is found proven, but no conviction is recorded. Your criminal record stays clean. Your employer never sees it. Your travel visa applications are unaffected. That outcome depends on preparation: character references, evidence of repayment or restitution, a clear expression of remorse, and a sentencing submission that gives the magistrate a complete picture of who you are, not just what happened in a department store.

At the other end, robbery under s94 carries a maximum of 14 years. Robbery in company under s97 carries 20 years. Armed robbery with wounding under s98 carries 25 years, and according to Judicial Commission sentencing data, the majority of armed robbery convictions in NSW result in full-time imprisonment. Aggravated break and enter under s112(2) carries 20 years. Receiving stolen goods under s188 carries up to 10 years.

Between those extremes sit conditional release orders, community correction orders, intensive correction orders served in the community, and suspended sentences. The specific section on your Court Attendance Notice determines which court hears your matter, what the maximum penalty is, and which sentencing options are available. A s117 larceny charge in the Local Court and a s98 armed robbery in the District Court aren't variations of the same problem. They're different proceedings with different rules.

Both involve taking someone else's property. The line between them is force.

Larceny under s117 of the Crimes Act 1900 is the taking and carrying away of property belonging to another person without their consent, with the intent to permanently deprive them of it. No force, no threat, no confrontation. Shoplifting from a store is larceny. Pocketing a wallet left on a table is larceny. The maximum penalty is 5 years imprisonment, and it's dealt with summarily in the Local Court.

Robbery under s94 is larceny plus the use or threat of force against a person. The same act of taking property becomes robbery when force or intimidation is used to accomplish it, or to prevent resistance, or to facilitate escape afterwards. The maximum jumps to 14 years, and it's an indictable offence that can be dealt with in the District Court.

From there, the categories escalate. Robbery in company under s97 (two or more offenders acting together) carries 20 years. Armed robbery under s97(2) carries 25 years. Armed robbery with wounding under s98 also carries 25 years but attracts a standard non-parole period of 7 years, meaning the sentencing judge must impose at least that period unless there are reasons to depart from it.

Why the distinction matters in practice: a robbery charge can sometimes be reduced to a larceny charge through negotiation with the prosecution, particularly where the element of force is marginal. A push, a grab for the bag, a verbal exchange that the prosecution characterises as intimidation but that doesn't clearly meet the legal definition of threat. That reduction changes the charge from strictly indictable to summary, moves the matter from the District Court to the Local Court, drops the maximum from 14 years to 5 years, and opens up sentencing options that didn't exist before. The difference between the two charges is often the difference between imprisonment and walking out without a conviction.

In many first-offence shoplifting matters, yes. A Section 10 under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 means the charge is found proven but no conviction is recorded. Your criminal record stays clean.

Section 10 is not automatic. The magistrate considers the nature and seriousness of the offence, your character, your age, your health, your mental condition, and whether a conviction is warranted given all the circumstances. For shoplifting, the factors that work in your favour are a low-value item, no prior record, genuine remorse, evidence of repayment or restitution to the store, and character references from employers, community members, or professionals who can speak to your character outside this incident.

The preparation is the defence. A guilty plea without any supporting material is a missed opportunity. The magistrate needs to see who you are, not just what happened. Two character references from different parts of your life (a work supervisor and a long-standing personal contact, for example), a letter of apology to the retailer, evidence that you've already repaid the value of the item, and a short written statement from you explaining what led to the offence and what has changed since. Those submissions are what move a result from "convicted of shoplifting" to "no conviction recorded."

One point worth making directly: for straightforward shoplifting with clear CCTV footage and no viable defence to the charge itself, a well-prepared guilty plea is almost always the better strategy. Contesting the charge and losing removes the mitigating value of an early guilty plea, which attracts a sentencing discount under s22 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The early plea combined with strong sentencing material is the path to a Section 10 in the vast majority of first-offence shoplifting matters we handle at Parramatta.

We also assess whether a s32 application under the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 is appropriate. Where a diagnosed condition contributed to the offending, a s32 diversion can result in the charge being dismissed entirely, without any finding of guilt.

There is no single "best" defence. The right approach depends on the evidence, and the evidence determines whether you contest the charge or plead guilty and focus on the sentencing outcome.

For contested matters, the prosecution must prove every element of larceny under s117 of the Crimes Act 1900: that you took property belonging to another, that you carried it away, that you did so without consent, and that you intended to permanently deprive the owner of it. Each element is a potential weakness.

Intent is the element that breaks the most shoplifting cases. Self-scanning errors, forgotten items in a trolley, misunderstandings at checkout, or genuinely absent-minded behaviour can each undermine the prosecution's claim that you intended to steal. If you picked up an item and walked past the checkout, the prosecution needs to exclude innocent explanations for that conduct. A claim of right (an honest but mistaken belief that you had a right to the property) is a complete defence under s9.1A.

Where a mental health condition contributed to the offending, s32 of the Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 provides a diversion pathway. If a psychologist's report connects the offending to a diagnosed condition, the magistrate can dismiss the charge outright under s32. No finding of guilt. No conviction. No criminal record. This pathway applies more broadly than people think, covering conditions from anxiety and depression through to cognitive impairments and compulsive disorders.

For the majority of first-offence shoplifting matters, though, the honest answer is that the "best defence" is not a legal argument at trial. It's the sentencing preparation. When the CCTV is clear and the evidence is strong, contesting the charge risks a worse outcome than an early guilty plea with thorough sentencing material aimed at a Section 10 dismissal. That's not giving up. It's choosing the strategy most likely to keep your record clean.

There is no minimum sentence for stealing in NSW. Unlike some jurisdictions, NSW criminal law does not prescribe mandatory minimum penalties for larceny or theft offences. The sentencing magistrate or judge has full discretion across the range of available options.

That means the lowest possible outcome for a stealing charge is a Section 10(1)(a) dismissal: the charge is found proven, but you receive no conviction, no penalty, and no conditions. Your criminal record shows nothing. The highest is 5 years imprisonment for larceny under s117 of the Crimes Act 1900 (or significantly more for robbery and aggravated offences).

Between those two points, the options in ascending severity are: Section 10(1)(b), a conditional release order without conviction for up to 2 years; a conditional release order with conviction; a community correction order with conditions such as community service or supervision; an intensive correction order served in the community for up to 2 years (Local Court) or 3 years (District/Supreme Court); a suspended sentence; and full-time imprisonment.

The sentence in any individual matter depends on the value of the property, the circumstances of the offence, your prior record, your personal circumstances, and the strength of your sentencing submissions. A $40 cosmetics theft from a Parramatta retailer with no prior history and strong character evidence will almost certainly end without a conviction. A $50,000 larceny by a clerk or servant under s156, or a pattern of offending over months, is a different conversation.

The absence of a mandatory minimum is the space where defence preparation matters most. Every step between dismissal and imprisonment is available, and the material put before the court determines where your matter lands on that range.

Receiving stolen goods under s188 of the Crimes Act 1900 means receiving, possessing, or disposing of property that you know to be stolen, or that you ought reasonably to know is stolen. The maximum penalty is 10 years imprisonment.

This charge catches people who never stole anything. Storing a box of electronics for a friend without asking too many questions. Buying a phone at a price that seemed too good but that you didn't think through. Accepting items from a family member who's been involved in theft. The prosecution doesn't need to prove you were part of the original stealing. It needs to prove you received the property and that you knew, or should have known, it was stolen.

"Ought reasonably to know" is the phrase that widens the net. The prosecution can argue circumstantial knowledge: the price was suspiciously low, the seller had no receipt or documentation, the handover happened in unusual circumstances, or the items were clearly inconsistent with the seller's means. You don't need to have been told "this is stolen." If a reasonable person in your position would have concluded the items were stolen, the element is satisfied.

The defence often turns on what you actually knew at the time. If you genuinely believed the items were legitimately owned, and that belief was honestly held, the knowledge element isn't made out. We examine the circumstances of the transaction: what was said, what was paid, what a reasonable person in your position would have concluded, and whether the prosecution can exclude your version of events beyond reasonable doubt.

For first-offence matters involving low-value property, the sentencing range includes Section 10 dismissals and conditional release orders, particularly where you can demonstrate that you weren't involved in the underlying theft and that your role was limited. For commercial-scale receiving, or where the property value is high and the circumstances suggest you were part of an organised chain, imprisonment becomes a realistic outcome.

Break and enter under s112 of the Crimes Act 1900 is entering a building with the intent to commit a serious indictable offence inside. Despite the name, "break" doesn't require smashing a window or forcing a lock. It includes opening an unlocked door, pushing through a gap, or entering through any opening that isn't intended as a normal point of entry. The "break" element is about entering without authority, not about physical damage.

The maximum penalty for break and enter is 14 years imprisonment. Aggravated break and enter under s112(2) carries 20 years, and aggravation includes circumstances where you were armed, in company, caused damage, knew someone was inside, or inflicted actual bodily harm during the offence.

Three elements need to be proven: the break (unauthorised entry), the entry (physical presence inside the premises), and the intent to commit a serious indictable offence inside. Intent at the time of entry is critical. If you entered a building for a reason other than committing an offence, even if you subsequently committed one after entering, the prosecution's case on break and enter is weaker. Circumstantial cases built on proximity to the building, possession of tools, or presence in the area late at night don't automatically prove all three elements.

Break and enter is strictly indictable, meaning it's heard in the District Court, not the Local Court. That changes the process, the timeline, and the sentencing environment. Committal proceedings in the Local Court precede the District Court trial, and the entire matter from charge to resolution can take 12 months or more.

We test every element separately: the lawfulness of the entry, the quality of the identification evidence, the forensic evidence linking you to the scene, and whether the prosecution can prove intent at the point of entry. If any element isn't proven beyond reasonable doubt, the charge fails.

Armed robbery under s97(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 is robbery committed while armed with a dangerous weapon. The maximum penalty is 25 years imprisonment. Armed robbery with wounding under s98 also carries 25 years and attracts a standard non-parole period of 7 years under s54A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.

The standard non-parole period is the starting point for sentencing. The judge must set the non-parole period at 7 years unless there are reasons to depart from it based on the specific circumstances. In practice, the majority of armed robbery convictions result in full-time imprisonment. According to Judicial Commission sentencing data, the majority of robbery convictions in NSW are custodial.

"Armed with a dangerous weapon" extends beyond firearms. A knife, a screwdriver, a piece of broken glass, a bat, or any object used or threatened in a way that could cause injury qualifies. The prosecution needs to prove you had the weapon and that it was used in connection with the robbery, either to threaten, to inflict injury, or to prevent resistance.

Robbery in company under s97(1), where two or more people act together, carries a maximum of 20 years. This charge often applies to group offences at service stations, retail stores, or in public spaces. Where both "armed" and "in company" elements are present, the penalties compound and the sentencing expectations are severe.

The defence in armed robbery matters targets the elements. Identification evidence is frequently the weakest link: incidents at night, involving face coverings, multiple offenders, panicked witnesses, and poor-quality CCTV footage. We request CCTV footage early, before retention periods expire, and engage forensic analysts where the footage quality is poor or the identification relies on body shape, clothing, or gait rather than a clear face.

Where the evidence on the "armed" element is contestable, reducing an armed robbery charge to robbery or larceny through negotiation changes the penalty range entirely.

A theft conviction gives most employers lawful grounds to terminate your employment, and the process can move faster than the court case.

Under the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth), serious misconduct includes theft from the employer and criminal conduct that is incompatible with the employee's duties. Summary dismissal (immediate termination without notice) is available for serious misconduct. If you're charged with stealing from your workplace, the employer may terminate you before the matter is even heard in court, based on their own internal investigation. The dismissal doesn't require a conviction.

For theft outside of work, the position depends on the role. Employers in finance, banking, government, healthcare, aged care, childcare, and security are required or expected to screen for dishonesty offences. A conviction for shoplifting, even a $30 item unrelated to your job, can trigger termination or non-renewal for roles that require a clean National Police Check. The dollar amount on the charge sheet is irrelevant to the screening process. It's the dishonesty flag that matters.

This is where the Section 10 question becomes a career question, not just a legal one. If you receive a Section 10 dismissal (no conviction recorded), the charge does not appear on a National Police Check. Your employer doesn't see it. Background screening returns clean. That outcome preserves your employment in ways a conviction cannot, even if the conviction carries a small fine and no further penalty.

For roles with specific licensing requirements (security, financial services, real estate, childcare), the licensing body may conduct its own inquiry independent of the criminal proceedings. A charge alone, before any conviction, can trigger a review of your fitness to hold the licence. We factor those licensing implications into the defence strategy from the start, because the sentencing outcome that protects your licence may not be the same outcome that minimises the criminal penalty.

A theft conviction appears on your National Police Check indefinitely, and its impact on employment reaches further than the penalty imposed by the court.

Employers in industries with mandatory background screening (finance, government, healthcare, aged care, childcare, education, security, and law enforcement) will see the conviction on every check for the rest of your career. A dishonesty offence is treated differently from other criminal records in employment screening. Many employers have blanket policies excluding candidates with dishonesty convictions, regardless of when the offence occurred or how minor the circumstances were.

Under the Criminal Records Act 1991 (NSW), the spent convictions scheme can remove certain convictions from disclosure after 10 years for adults. But the scheme has significant limitations. It does not apply if the actual sentence imposed was more than 6 months imprisonment (per Criminal Records Act 1991 s7). It does not apply to certain regulated employment categories. And it does not apply to sexual or drug trafficking offences.

Beyond employment, a theft conviction affects travel visa applications to the US, UK, and Canada. The US ESTA visa waiver program asks about criminal convictions, and a dishonesty offence can trigger refusal. UK Standard Visitor Visa applications require disclosure of criminal convictions. Canada's Immigration and Refugee Protection Act treats theft as a hybrid offence that can render you inadmissible.

For people holding temporary visas in Australia, a theft conviction raises character grounds under s501 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth). A visa cancellation review doesn't require a prison sentence. A conviction alone can trigger the character test, particularly for dishonesty offences.

The way to avoid all of these consequences is to avoid the conviction. A Section 10 dismissal does not appear on a National Police Check, is not disclosable to employers, and does not affect visa applications. The sentencing preparation that targets a Section 10 is the most valuable work we do in minor theft matters.

The "10 10 80 rule" is an industry concept from the loss prevention sector, not a legal term. It proposes that 10% of people will never steal, 10% will always steal, and 80% could steal under the right circumstances. Retailers use it to frame their approach to theft prevention. It has no legal significance in a courtroom.

We mention it because clients bring it up, and because the underlying idea reflects something we see in practice. The vast majority of people charged with shoplifting are not career criminals. They're people who made a bad decision in a moment of stress, distraction, financial pressure, or impaired judgment. They've never been in trouble before. They're mortified that they're standing in a police station or sitting in a lawyer's office. And they're terrified about what a criminal record will do to their job, their family, and their future.

That profile is exactly the profile that produces the best results in court. First-time offenders with clean records, stable employment, community ties, and genuine remorse are the candidates most likely to receive a Section 10 dismissal. The magistrate isn't dealing with someone whose entire criminal history is in front of them. They're dealing with a person whose one entry in the justice system is this charge, and the sentencing submissions are an opportunity to show that this incident is the exception, not the pattern.

The "80%" framing resonates because it captures the reality that most shoplifting charges land on ordinary people. The legal system has pathways built for that reality, from Section 10 dismissals to s32 mental health diversions to conditional release orders. The question is whether those pathways are properly accessed with the right preparation, and that's where legal advice before your first mention date matters most.

The cost depends on the charge, the court, and the complexity of the matter. A first-offence shoplifting charge in the Local Court and an armed robbery trial in the District Court are different proceedings with different workloads, and the fees reflect that.

For straightforward guilty plea matters in the Local Court (shoplifting, minor larceny, receiving stolen goods), fixed-fee packages are available. These cover the legal advice, sentencing preparation, character reference guidance, written submissions, and representation at the sentencing hearing. You know the total cost before you commit.

For defended hearings in the Local Court, where you're contesting the charge, the fee covers case preparation, evidence review, witness management, cross-examination, and the hearing day itself. Defended hearings require more preparation time and usually more court time, so the fee is higher than a guilty plea matter.

For indictable matters in the District Court (robbery, armed robbery, break and enter, aggravated break and enter), the fee structure is staged. Committal proceedings, pre-trial preparation, briefing of counsel where a barrister is retained, and the trial itself are each separate stages. We outline the cost of each stage before it begins so you can plan. District Court matters also involve disbursements: forensic expert fees, subpoena costs, transcript fees, and barrister's fees if senior counsel is briefed.

One honest point about value: for a first-offence shoplifting charge, the difference between a conviction and a Section 10 dismissal is the difference between a permanent dishonesty flag on your criminal record and a clean check for the rest of your career. The cost of proper legal representation in that context is measured against the cost of the conviction following you through every employment screening, visa application, and professional licence renewal you'll face.

Initial consultations are fixed-fee. Call 1800 527 529 or [book a consultation](/consultation). Open 7 days.