California Penal Code section 496 makes it a crime to buy, receive, conceal, sell, or withhold property that the defendant knows or reasonably should know is stolen. PC 496 is often charged alongside theft offenses or as a standalone charge when police recover stolen property in the defendant’s possession. The knowledge element is the heart of every PC 496 case. This page covers the elements, the $950 Prop 47 threshold, the civil treble damages provision, and the defense angles.

Elements of PC 496

The prosecution must prove: (1) the property was stolen; (2) the defendant bought, received, sold, concealed, or withheld the property; AND (3) the defendant knew or reasonably should have known the property was stolen. The knowledge element is satisfied either by actual knowledge or by circumstances that would have led a reasonable person to know the property was stolen.

Felony or misdemeanor after Prop 47

Before Proposition 47, PC 496 was a wobbler regardless of property value. After Prop 47 (codified at PC 490.2 and amending PC 496), receiving stolen property valued at $950 or less is a misdemeanor unless the defendant has certain disqualifying prior convictions (super strikes under PC 667(e)(2)(C)(iv) or PC 290 registrants). Receiving stolen property valued at more than $950 remains a wobbler.

Misdemeanor PC 496: up to one year in county jail and up to $1,000 fine. Felony PC 496: 16 months, 2 years, or 3 years in county jail under PC 1170(h), plus fines and probation conditions.

The civil treble damages provision (PC 496(c))

One of the unusual features of PC 496 is the civil treble damages provision in subsection (c). A property owner can sue any person who violates PC 496 for three times the value of the stolen property, plus attorney fees and costs, even without a criminal conviction. This provision has produced significant civil litigation and creates leverage in some criminal cases where the property owner is willing to drop civil claims in exchange for cooperation or restitution.

The knowledge defense

The knowledge element is the heart of most PC 496 defenses. The prosecution must prove that the defendant knew (actually) or reasonably should have known (constructively) that the property was stolen. Common defense scenarios:

Legitimate purchase. If the defendant paid fair market value through a normal commercial channel (Craigslist, eBay, garage sale, friend’s recommendation), the “reasonably should have known” standard is difficult for the prosecution to meet.

No reason to know. A pawn-shop receipt, a bill of sale, or a verbal explanation from the seller can support the “no reason to know” defense.

Innocent receipt + lack of subsequent knowledge. If the defendant received the property without knowing it was stolen and never subsequently learned of its status, the knowledge element fails.

Other common defenses

The property was not actually stolen. Sometimes property is reported stolen but turns out to have been authorized for transfer, given as a gift, or otherwise lawfully transferred. Proof of the “stolen” status is the prosecution’s burden.

The defendant did not “receive” the property. Mere proximity to stolen property is not enough; the prosecution must prove a defendant exercised some dominion or control over it.

Fourth Amendment suppression. If the search that produced the property violated the Fourth Amendment, a PC 1538.5 motion can eliminate the evidence.

Innocent agent or innocent storage. Storing property for a friend without inquiry into its provenance can be a viable defense when paired with credible testimony about the relationship and the reason for storage.

What to do right now

If you have been arrested or contacted about possessing stolen property, do not consent to a search of your home, vehicle, or storage unit. Do not give a statement to detectives. Document where and how you obtained the property in question (receipt, message thread, witness names, payment method). The knowledge element of PC 496 is often defensible, and the evidence supporting a “no reason to know” defense is most accessible early in the case.

The Law Office of Zak Fisher is a Los Angeles criminal defense practice. This page is general legal information, not legal advice for any specific matter. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome in your case. No attorney-client relationship is formed without a signed engagement letter. Attorney Advertising. Zak Fisher, Esq., California Bar No. 332712.

Penal Code § 496: Receiving Stolen Property Defense