The Short Answer
Embezzlement under Penal Code 503 is theft committed by someone who was entrusted with the money or property, an employee, a bookkeeper, a fiduciary. It is charged as petty or grand theft depending on the amount, so most cases over $950 are wobblers. The whole case turns on fraudulent intent: an accounting error, a genuine authorization, or a good-faith belief that you were owed the money is a complete defense, and restitution can often resolve these matters without a conviction.
Embezzlement accusations usually come from a workplace: an employer's audit finds a discrepancy, and suddenly a trusted employee is facing a criminal referral. What looks like theft to an auditor is frequently a bookkeeping mistake, an authorized transaction, a commission dispute, or a loan everyone understood, until the relationship soured.
Farris Law Firm defends embezzlement cases across Orange County and Los Angeles discreetly and thoroughly, because for most people accused of this, the career and reputation stakes are even higher than the criminal ones.
What the Prosecution Must Prove
A relationship of trust
You were entrusted with the property, which is what separates embezzlement from ordinary theft.
Fraudulent conversion
You used the property for your own purposes in violation of that trust.
Intent to deprive
You intended to deprive the owner of the property, at least temporarily. This is the element cases are won on.
Value determines the charge
Under $950 is petty theft; over $950 is grand theft, a wobbler. Aggregated amounts can trigger enhancements.
Defenses That Win Embezzlement Cases
Intent is everything, and workplace money is messy:
- No fraudulent intent: accounting errors and honest mistakes are not crimes
- You had authorization or a good-faith claim to the money
- A civil dispute over wages, commissions, or a loan, not a theft
- The accounting does not actually add up: forensic review that undercuts the loss figure
- Insufficient proof that you, specifically, took anything
- Restitution and civil compromise that resolve the matter without a conviction
Frequently Asked Questions
My employer says I stole, but I believed I was owed that money. Is that a defense?
Yes, it can be a complete one. A good-faith belief that you had a right to the money, even a mistaken one, negates the fraudulent intent embezzlement requires. Commission disputes, expense reimbursements, and understood loans are common examples we develop into a defense.
Can I be charged even if I intended to pay it back?
Potentially yes, because the law reaches even temporary deprivation, but your intent to repay is powerful evidence against fraudulent intent and central to negotiation. How that intent is documented and presented matters enormously, which is why you should not explain yourself to your employer or investigators without counsel.
Will my employer's internal investigation be used against me?
It can be. Statements you make to HR or in an internal interview are often handed to prosecutors. If your employer is investigating you for possible embezzlement, talk to a defense lawyer before you participate, not after.
Does paying the money back make it go away?
Restitution can be part of a favorable resolution, sometimes a civil compromise that ends in dismissal, but it must be structured correctly. Repaying the wrong way can look like an admission of guilt. Let a lawyer handle the sequence.