Theft Case Results in Austin, TX

Charge

Theft Under $100 (Class C Misdemeanor)

Location

Williamson County, Georgetown Municipal Court

Allegations

Store loss prevention detained our client after alleging a price‑tag switch on a low‑value item, and police issued a citation for Class C theft. We demanded full discovery and obtained surveillance and point‑of‑sale footage showing the client paying for the merchandise. The state could not produce the original item or clear images tying any removed label to the purchase, and several video files they provided would not play. We pressed those evidentiary gaps and prepared for trial. Facing a weak record, the prosecution dismissed the case.

Charge

Theft (Felony)

Location

Hays County, 428TH DC

Allegations

Loss prevention detained our client after a store incident where a small item was left unpaid. Despite the low value, the case was filed as a felony based on prior theft history. The client initially accepted blame at the scene, but a companion later submitted a written statement claiming responsibility for the unpaid merchandise. We secured that statement, scrutinized the store's account of events, and emphasized the minimal value and conflicting narratives. Using that leverage, we pushed the prosecutor to reduce the charge and negotiated straight probation.

Charge

Theft

Location

Williamson County, None

Allegations

The client was charged with theft in Williamson County after a reported property incident. We gathered the police reports and discovery and methodically tested the evidence against each required element. In meetings with the prosecutor, we questioned whether the state could prove knowing appropriation or intent beyond a reasonable doubt. We set the matter on a contested track and prepared motions to address evidentiary issues. The state dismissed the case.

Charge

Theft (Felony)

Location

Williamson County, 277th Judicial District Court

Allegations

State investigators accused our client of felony theft tied to caregiver timesheets, alleging they were paid for services not actually provided over an extended period. The client contacted us before surrendering. We coordinated the surrender and obtained the agency's billing logs and time records. Our review showed overlapping caregiving by family members and agency instructions that made the clock in and out process ambiguous, supporting a lack of intent. We leveraged those issues and the client's cooperation to negotiate deferred probation, keeping a conviction off the record.

Charge

Unauthorized Use of a Motor Vehicle

Location

Travis County, 460th District Court

Allegations

Police alleged our client took and drove a vehicle without consent after it was reported stolen and later pinged by a tracking system. Dealership staff detained the individual when they came to ask about a key, and the case was filed for unauthorized use. We dug into the reports, surveillance, and the tracker records to map who actually had possession and when. The witness accounts and the paperwork left gaps in how the state tied operation to lack of consent at the relevant times. After we presented those problems and made clear we were prepared to litigate, the prosecutor dismissed the charge.

Charge

Theft of Property $30,000 to $150,000

Location

Travis County, 460th District Court

Allegations

The client was indicted for felony theft after a vehicle with a tracker was reported stolen, and store employees detained the person at a dealership when they came in to ask about a key. We pulled the police reports and witness statements and reconstructed the timeline from the materials the state relied on. That review exposed inconsistencies about authorization to possess the vehicle and when it was reported stolen, as well as questions about the dealership detention. We presented those problems to the prosecution, and the state dismissed the case.

Charge

Theft (Felony)

Location

Williamson County, 26th Judicial District Court

Allegations

During a home renovation dispute, the client was accused of taking a deposit without completing the job. We gathered contracts, messages, and payment records showing most of the work was performed and that a substantial portion of funds went directly to independent contractors, not the client. We addressed a missed court setting, got the warrant recalled, and opened a dialogue with the prosecutor. The complaining party's representative confirmed they did not want to pursue the case. Framing the matter as a civil contract issue, not theft, we secured a full dismissal.

Charge

Forgery (Felony)

Location

Williamson County, 26th District Court

Allegations

The client was accused of forging checks from another person's account, a serious felony. We moved quickly to investigate and obtained prior statements from the account holder that did not implicate our client and pointed toward another individual. We compared those statements with the police reports and exposed inconsistencies in how the checks were attributed. When the complainant later became unavailable to testify, we pressed the evidentiary gaps with the prosecutor. The state dismissed the case.

Charge

Aggravated Robbery

Location

Travis County, 167TH DISTRICT COURT

Allegations

Police alleged the client and another person carried out an armed robbery at a residence, using force and taking cash and contraband. The complainant said they knew the client and identified him as a suspect. We scrutinized that identification, compared statements for inconsistencies, and pressed the gaps in the evidence. We also presented mitigation, including no prior record and steps toward treatment and housing. After sustained negotiations, the state agreed to deferred probation, avoiding prison and a final conviction.

Charge

Misdemeanor Theft

Location

Williamson County, CC5

Allegations

Store loss prevention detained our client after they exited through an outdoor section and accused them of bypassing the register. The client was asked to sign store paperwork and cooperated. When police arrived, the officer expressed doubt that the facts amounted to theft, but made an arrest at the store’s insistence. We highlighted the officer’s stated uncertainty and the prosecution’s heavy reliance on loss prevention, along with the client’s clean record. We presented these issues to the prosecutor and the State dismissed the case.

Charge

Theft (Class C)

Location

Hays County, Buda Municipal Court

Allegations

The client and friends visited a retail store where a small food item was opened and later set down and forgotten. They left, returned a short time later, and police were called, resulting in a citation for Class C theft. We got involved quickly, pressed for the evidence, and preserved a text message from another person apologizing for opening the item. We presented that context, along with the client's clean record, and questioned whether there was any intent to steal. The prosecutor agreed the case was not worth pursuing and dismissed it.

Charge

Engaging in Organized Crime

Location

Travis County, 460th District Court

Allegations

The client was stopped while driving a vehicle borrowed from a housemate, which officers later learned was stolen. Prosecutors folded the client into an organized crime case tied to a larger auto theft ring. We combed through the entire file and confirmed the only items pointing at our client were that one drive, ordinary phone contact with the housemate, and a misattributed social media photo. Records in the car, including identification, title, and VIN details, traced back to others. We confronted the state with these gaps and prepared to set the case for trial. The prosecution dismissed the charge.