Top
Dealing In Stolen Property

Dealing in Stolen Property 

We Have Offices Conveniently Located in Deland and Daytona Beach 

Dealing in stolen property is a crime that is explained in Florida Statute 812.019. If you are charged with dealing in stolen property, you find yourself charged with a plethora of other charges, including theft and burglary. Navigating a situation such as this can seem overwhelming, but understanding the law and the accusations that you are faced with serves an enormous benefit to you. In DeLand, we find most of our dealing in stolen property cases derive out of our local pawn shops and scrap metal receptacles. When a property is reported stolen, the first place the officers begin to search for those items are in those shops.

We have offices in DeLand and Daytona Beach and help clients throughout Central Florida fight their criminal charges.

First, it is important to distinguish between the two types of dealing in stolen property: fencing and organizing.

“Fencing” simply means trafficking the stolen property, where trafficking can be either buying or selling. Fencing also applies if you merely intend to traffic in the stolen property, regardless of whether or not the crime is actually committed. Under the law, the State must prove beyond every reasonable doubt that you trafficked or endeavored to traffic a property, and that you knew or should have known that the property was stolen. Notice that the law does not require for you to conclusively know that the property was stolen, and it does not require you to be the thief. Instead, the law uses what are called “inferences,” or assumptions about your knowledge based on the circumstances.

The same applies for organizing. Organizing dealing in stolen property requires the State to prove, again, beyond all reasonable doubt, that you initiated, organized, planned, financed, managed, or supervised the theft of a property, and that you trafficked the property. Again, the law uses inferences to determine your level of knowledge about the criminal activity. These inferences include:

  • Possession of recently stolen property,
  • Proof of purchase or sale of property that is substantially below the fair market value,
  • If you are a dealer in property (such as a pawn shop owner), operating the purchase or sale of property outside of normal business practices, or
  • If you are a dealer in property, the name or phone number of a person on the property other than the individual selling the property

All of the above can be used to infer that you knew or should have known that the property was stolen. But there is one common thread between all of the inferences: they are all taken as true unless sufficiently explained.

This is where hiring an aggressive, experienced defense attorney is exceptionally important. Attorney Matt Thompson has experience negotiating with the State and can help you explain the circumstances of your particular scenario. Having worked for 10 years at the State Attorney’s Office, Matt Thompson knows the law, and he knows how to think like a prosecutor in order to negotiate your position. The penalties for dealing in stolen property are high: if convicted in fencing, you stand to be convicted of a second-degree felony, with a possibility of 15 years of imprisonment, 15 years of probation, and a fine of $10,000. If convicted of organizing, you could face 30 years of imprisonment, 30 years of probation, and a fine of $10,000. With all of this at stake, don’t hesitate to call Thompson Law, P.A. for your free case evaluation at (386) 280-4977.

Client-Focused. RESULT-DRIVEN.

Working Closely with You To Build a Strong Case
  • Charges Reduced Domestic Battery

    Attorney Thompson provided a letter outlining defenses in case. State reviewed letter and spoke to the witnesses and offered to reduce the charges to a non-violent disorderly conduct with no jail and no probation.

  • All Charges Dismissed Sexual Battery & Domestic Battery

    Mr. Thompson took depositions of the victim showing that the victim was not truthful with police when she provided her statement as to what happened. Confronted victim with social media posts, bank records, and telephone records to show that she was not in the places that she stated she was during the time the alleged crime took place. Case 1 was dismissed and the Defendant pled to Case 2 and received two (2) years of prison and credit for fifteen (15) months in prison.

  • All Charges Dismissed Domestic Violence

    Client was texting a friend when her significant other tried to grab for her phone. When the client tried to pull away, the victim claimed that he was battered and the client was arrested and brought before DCF due a child being in the house. Attorney Matt Thompson wrote a letter to the State explaining the discrepancy in evidence and claimed that the client was in fact moving away from the victim and did not intentionally try to hit the victim. All charges against the client were dismissed.

  • All Charges Dismissed Racing on the Highway

    Client was arrested after leaving a car show in a fast vehicle. Officers suspected the client of racing another vehicle and police officers pulled him over, drug him out of his vehicle, and arrested him for both racing on the highway and resisting an officer without violence. Upon review of the body camera video, Attorney Matt Thompson raised an excessive use of force complaint against the arresting officer. All charges against the client were dismissed.

  • Charge Reduced Felony Child Abuse

    Attorney Thompson took over for the Defendant’s prior attorney who was unable to obtain an offer of anything other than a felony conviction. Attorney Thompson prepared a sworn Motion to Dismiss and was offered a misdemeanor with no probation or jail.

  • All Charges Dismissed Racing on the Highway

    Client was arrested after leaving a car show in a fast vehicle. Officers suspected the client of racing another vehicle and police officers pulled him over, drug him out of his vehicle, and arrested him for both racing on the highway and resisting an officer without violence. Upon review of the body camera video, Attorney Matt Thompson raised an excessive use of force complaint against the arresting officer. All charges against the client were dismissed.