Yes, And It Happens 47,000 Times Per Year

You can absolutely be arrested for petit larceny in New York, even though it’s a Class A misdemeanor for stealing property valued at $1,000 or less under NY Penal Law § 155.25. NYPD arrested 47,283 people for petit larceny in 2024, with Manhattan leading at 18,000 arrests, mostly from Midtown retail stores. Whether you get arrested and processed through Central Booking or receive a Desk Appearance Ticket depends on factors like your ID, criminal history, and which precinct responds. The 14th Precinct covering Union Square processes everyone through arrest due to organized retail theft rings, while the 19th Precinct on the Upper East Side issues more DATs for first-time offenders with valid ID.

The distinction between arrest and DAT matters enormously. An arrest means 20-24 hours in holding before arraignment, fingerprinting that goes into state and federal databases, and potential job loss from missing work. A DAT lets you go home with a court date, though you’re still technically arrested and must appear or face additional charges. Since 2020’s bail reform, judges must release petit larceny defendants on recognizance unless they have extensive warrant history, but you still endure the arrest process first.

Understanding Petit Larceny Under New York Law

Petit larceny requires stealing property worth $1,000 or less – one dollar over triggers grand larceny fourth degree under § 155.30, a Class E felony. The valuation isn’t what you think the item’s worth or what you could sell it for, but the retail price at time of theft. That designer handbag marked down 70% still counts at original retail for charging purposes if the store can document it.

Common scenarios include shoplifting from CVS or Duane Reade (they prosecute everything), taking an unattended phone at Starbucks, or fare beating which gets charged as theft of services under § 165.15. But here’s what catches people: stealing from your employer, even small amounts, often gets charged as grand larceny through aggregation theory – multiple small thefts over time combined to exceed $1,000. Todd Spodek here – last month I represented a bartender who pocketed tips meant for the pool. Each night was maybe $40, but over three months it totaled $3,600. Prosecutors charged grand larceny third degree, a Class D felony, by aggregating every shift.

The intent element trips people up. You must intend to deprive the owner permanently. Borrowing without permission isn’t larceny if you planned to return it, though prosecutors argue otherwise. In People v. Jennings, 69 N.Y.2d 103 (1986), the Court of Appeals held that even temporary takings can constitute larceny if done with intent to use property against owner’s interests. This broad interpretation lets prosecutors charge larceny for conduct most people wouldn’t consider stealing.

The Real Penalties Beyond the Statute

The statutory penalties – up to 364 days jail, $1,000 fine, three years probation – tell only part of the story. A petit larceny conviction triggers collateral consequences that destroy careers and immigration status. Healthcare workers lose licenses automatically. Teachers face Department of Education termination proceedings. Anyone with TSA PreCheck or Global Entry loses it permanently.

For non-citizens, even legal permanent residents, petit larceny is a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) triggering deportation proceedings if sentenced to six months or more. That’s why defense attorneys fight for 179 days or less, staying under the immigration threshold. But prosecutors in Staten Island and Eastern Queens, knowing the immigration consequences, routinely demand six-month sentences specifically to trigger deportation.

The employment consequences last forever. Every background check shows the conviction. Applications ask “have you ever been convicted of a crime” not “convicted recently.” That teenage shoplifting becomes permanent scarlet letter. Financial services, healthcare, education, childcare – all effectively closed careers. One client, a Chase bank analyst, lost his Series 7 license over a $30 shoplifting conviction from Whole Foods. Career ended over organic raspberries.

Arrest Procedures and DAT Eligibility

Whether you get arrested or receive a DAT depends on specific factors. NYPD Patrol Guide § 208-19 sets DAT eligibility criteria: valid ID, New York area address, no outstanding warrants, no violent crime history. But individual officers have discretion, and precinct commanders set informal policies based on local crime patterns.

Midtown South and Midtown North precincts rarely issue DATs for retail theft because organized crews use fake IDs. The 13th Precinct covering Gramercy processes all Trader Joe’s shoplifters through arrest after organized rings targeted multiple locations. Meanwhile, Upper West Side’s 20th Precinct issues DATs for first-time offenders at Zabar’s or Fairway, recognizing the difference between food theft and organized retail crime.

If arrested, you’re processed at the precinct then transported to Manhattan Criminal Court at 100 Centre Street or borough-specific courts. The wait for arraignment ranges from 16 hours in Manhattan to 30+ hours in Brooklyn during busy weekends. You sit in holding cells with people arrested for everything from murder to farebeating. No phone except one call at booking. No food except a cheese sandwich if you’re lucky. Miss work, miss medication, miss custody exchanges – all before seeing a judge who will likely release you anyway.

Defenses That Actually Work in NYC Courts

The standard defenses – lack of intent, mistaken identity, duress – exist but rarely succeed at trial. What actually works are procedural challenges and negotiation strategies specific to New York practice.

Chain of custody issues kill retail theft cases. Stores must preserve surveillance footage, maintain evidence logs, and produce witnesses. Loss prevention officers change jobs frequently. Six months later at trial, the guard who stopped you works elsewhere, video gets deleted after 30 days, and receipts can’t be located. In Manhattan, Judge Ann Scherzer in Part F dismisses cases missing video evidence. In Brooklyn, Judge Devin Banks requires live testimony from arresting loss prevention, not just police officers.

The value challenge works when prosecutors overcharge. That North Face jacket might retail for $300 but if it was on clearance for $50, that’s the value for charging purposes under People v. Hayes. Prosecutors hate litigating value because it requires store managers testifying about pricing policies, markdown schedules, and inventory systems.

Mental health defenses work better than people think. Article 730 evaluations for fitness to proceed can lead to dismissals with treatment requirements instead of conviction. Queens has mental health court in Part QN-31 that diverts appropriate cases. Manhattan’s CASES program offers alternatives for people with documented mental illness who commit survival crimes.

Why Retail Stores Drive Prosecution Decisions

Target, CVS, and Walgreens drive petit larceny prosecutions in NYC by employing full-time court liaisons who appear at every hearing. These representatives push for jail sentences, oppose ACDs, and maintain “no-trespass” lists banning defendants from all locations nationwide. Small businesses rarely prosecute because they can’t afford employees sitting in court all day.

This creates prosecution disparities. Steal from Target at Atlantic Terminal, face aggressive prosecution with their corporate representative demanding jail time. Steal the same value from the bodega next door, charges likely dismissed because the owner won’t close shop to testify. Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg announced he wouldn’t prosecute shoplifting under $250, but Target’s lawyers got him to create exceptions for “organized retail theft,” defined broadly enough to include any repeat offender.

The power dynamic is real. One client shoplifted formula from CVS for her baby. First offense, employed, sympathetic facts. CVS’s court liaison demanded 30 days jail, threatened to appear at every hearing if offered less. Judge in Part AR-1 openly criticized CVS for criminalizing poverty but felt constrained by their corporate presence. Client took 10 days jail rather than risk trial with vindictive corporate prosecutor.