§ 53a-125b — Larceny in the sixth degree: Class C misdemeanor.

Connecticut § 53a-125b

• Jurisdiction: Connecticut
• Title 53a: Penal Code
• Ch. 952: Penal Code: Offenses

Text

(a) A person is guilty of larceny in the sixth degree when he commits larceny as defined in section 53a-119 and the value of the property or service is five hundred dollars or less. (b) Larceny in the sixth degree is a class C misdemeanor.

Legislative History

(P.A. 82-271, S. 6; P.A. 09-138, S. 6.) History: P.A. 09-138 amended Subsec. (a) to increase the maximum value of the property or service obtained from $250 to $500. Cited. 201 C. 559; 202 C. 369; 203 C. 682; 208 C. 387; 210 C. 435; 212 C. 50; 213 C. 233; 237 C. 613; 241 C. 439. Convictions under this section, Sec. 53a-129d and Sec. 53a-128d(2) do not violate the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy. 326 C. 310. When circumstantial evidence is capable of raising the logical inference of ownership, such evidence is sufficient as a matter of law despite the absence of testimony by the owner identifying the specific property as his own. 327 C. 297. Cited. 3 CA 132; 4 CA 676; 5 CA 599; 10 CA 130; Id., 503; 13 CA 214; Id., 438; Id., 578; 14 CA 88; Id., 205; Id., 272; Id., 309; 15 CA 197; 17 CA 273; 19 CA 48; 23 CA 123; 28 CA 195; 29 CA 843; 33 CA 432; 37 CA 228; 39 CA 384; 44 CA 125; 46 CA 778. Statutory requirement of “value” set forth in statute is satisfied where witness testified about the usefulness of coats that had been left in her vehicle; it was not necessary to prove coats were spun from silk or fashioned from the finest cloth to satisfy statutory requirement of “value”. 101 CA 144. Subsec. (a): Cited. 214 C. 161. Cited. 24 CA 502; 28 CA 469; 37 CA 482; 38 CA 643; 45 CA 6. No double jeopardy where defendant convicted of larceny in the sixth degree and robbery in the third degree. 100 CA 122. Ownership of property by store could not be inferred from evidence offered by state concerning value of such property, and state therefor failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt an essential element of larceny in the sixth degree. 163 CA 810; judgment reversed in part, see 327 C. 297. Evidence insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant or alleged coconspirator stole headphones, either as a substantive crime or as overt act in furtherance of conspiracy to commit larceny under Sec. 53a-48. 164 CA 25.