Penal Code 488 is California’s petty theft statute. In plain terms, it is theft where the value of what was taken is $950 or less — the line that separates petty theft from grand theft.
It is a misdemeanor, and for a first offense it is frequently resolvable without a conviction through diversion, civil compromise, or a negotiated dismissal.
What PC 488 Says
Section 488 defines petty theft as theft that is not grand theft — the catch-all for lower-value takings. The underlying definition of “theft” lives in PC 484. The practical takeaway: value drives the charge. At or under the threshold, it is petty theft; above it, the DA can reach for grand theft.
The $950 Line
Under California’s Proposition 47 framework, thefts of $950 or less are petty theft (a misdemeanor) — except firearm theft or a theft chargeable as an infraction. After Prop 47, petty theft with a prior (PC 666) requires more than a past theft conviction: the person must also be a PC 290 sex-offender registrant, have a “super-strike” prior (PC 667(e)(2)(C)(iv)), or have a prior elder/dependent-adult theft conviction (PC 368(d)/(e)). If the alleged value is close to the line, how the value is proven matters a lot.
Penalties
Petty theft is a misdemeanor carrying up to 6 months in county jail and/or a fine up to $1,000, plus possible restitution.
A theft conviction (with intent to permanently deprive) is treated as a crime of moral turpitude for immigration purposes, which can carry immigration consequences beyond the sentence — though a first-time petty theft often fits the “petty offense exception.” That is one reason to fight for a non-theft disposition, and note that a later expungement (PC 1203.4) does not erase the immigration effect.
PC 488 vs. Shoplifting (PC 459.5)
People mix these up. Shoplifting has its own statute (PC 459.5) for entering a commercial establishment, open during business hours, intending to commit theft. The distinction can affect strategy — see our full breakdown: petty theft vs. shoplifting in San Francisco.
Defenses and Ways It Ends Without a Conviction
Petty theft cases usually turn on intent and value — claim of right, no intent to permanently deprive, or a value dispute that keeps the case out of grand-theft territory. Beyond trial defenses, civil compromise (PC 1377) and judicial diversion (PC 1001.95) resolve many first-offense cases without a conviction. Full breakdown of how shoplifting cases get dismissed.
Free 30-Minute Consultation
A petty-theft charge is often more fixable than it feels — especially early. Tell me what happened and I will tell you the fastest path to a clean record.
Schedule Free ConsultationAbout the Author
Ahmed S. Hasan
San Francisco Criminal Defense Attorney · State Bar of California #364992
Ahmed S. Hasan is the founder of ASH Legal, a solo criminal defense practice based in San Francisco. The firm runs on flat-fee representation: one lawyer, one fee, from arraignment through resolution. No hourly billing. No surprise invoices.
Ahmed is a graduate of Emory University School of Law and a member in good standing of the State Bar of California (Bar #364992). His practice focuses on San Francisco misdemeanor defense — DUI, domestic violence, petty theft and shoplifting, drug possession, vandalism, trespassing, and assault and battery — with particular attention to diversion-track outcomes that end in dismissal under PC 1001.95, PC 1001.36 (Mental Health Diversion), PC 1001.80 (Military Diversion), and PC 1001.83 (Parental Caregiver Diversion).
Ahmed previously served as a post-bar clerk with the San Francisco Public Defender's Office, the city's largest indigent-defense practice. He is a member of the Asian Pacific American Bar Association of Silicon Valley.
He represents clients at the San Francisco Hall of Justice (850 Bryant Street) and the Civic Center Courthouse. The ASH Legal office is at 15 Boardman Place, Suite 301, San Francisco, CA 94103.
Free 30-minute consultations are available by phone or Zoom. (510) 545-6515 · ahmed@ashlegal.com