Justia Lawyer Rating
Avvo Client's Choice Award 2019 - Allan F. Friedman
Avvo Client's Choice Award 2017 - Allan F. Friedman
Top Contributor Award 2017 - Allan F. Friedman
Avvo Rating badge 10.0 - Allan F. Friedman
Elite Lawyer badge - Allan Friedman
10 Best attorney badge
BBB badge
CTLA badge
STAMFORD Chamber of Commerce badge
Connecticut Bar Association badge

Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-127f – Possession of a Shoplifting Device


Possesion of Shoplifting Device Under Connecticut law, the possession of any device designed or utilized to facilitate shoplifting by defeating anti-shoplifting or inventory control measures is illegal. Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-127f makes it illegal to possesses such devices under circumstances manifesting an intent to use the device for shoplifting.

Most arrests for possession of a shoplifting device occur during a shoplifting arrest. Still, there are instances where people have been arrested for mere possession of devices that were obviously intended to facilitate shoplifting were these individuals had no legitimate reason to own the device. An example of such a device is electronic, magnetic equipment to remove anti-theft tags from clothing.

Elements of the Crime Which Must be Proven by The State's Attorney

To prove that the accused is guilty of possession a shoplifting device under Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-127f, the prosecutor must prove the following elements of the crime:

  1. The defendant has in their possession;
  2. Any object specifically designed or adapted to facilitate shoplifting;
  3. Under circumstances manifesting an intent to use the device for shoplifting.

A man is caught exiting a store with unpaid merchandise that contained electronic security tags. To prevent the security tags from activating the alarms when he exited the store, the man employed a specially made "booster bag," which uses thick metallic material to shield the security tags. Since the man had passed all points of sale with the merchandise, he was arrested and charged with both larceny in the 6th degree in violation of Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-125b and possession of a shoplifting device in violation of Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-127f. The man could be convicted as the "booster bag" was a device designed to facilitate shoplifting, and he possessed the bag under circumstances manifesting an intent to use the device to shoplift.

A woman is pulled over for a motor vehicle stop, and the police officer smells the odor of marijuana and sees a bag of marijuana in the center console. When searching the vehicle, the officer finds a device designed to remove anti-theft security tags from clothes. Upon investigation, the officer finds surveillance tapes, which showed that the woman was staking out retail stores in the area a short time before she was pulled over. The woman had no legitimate reason to possess the device. The woman could be convicted for possession of a shoplifting device in violation of Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-127f because she possessed the device under circumstances which manifested an intent to use the device to shoplift.

Related OffensesDefenses to Connecticut General Statutes C.G.S. § 53a-127f – Possession of a Shoplifting Device

It is not illegal to possess a device that could be used to facilitate shoplifting. The state must prove that the device was designed or adapted to counteract inventory control devices. Also, the state has to prove that the possession took place under circumstances which demonstrated an intent to shoplift. In many situations, police try to use this statute to charge shoplifters for possession of simple items that have no connection to counteracting inventory control devices. If you have been charged with this offense, you should contact a Stamford shoplifting lawyer to go over the facts of your case to determine the best defense strategy to fight the allegations against you.

If you have no prior criminal convictions, you may want to explore the possibility of using a diversionary program for first-time offenders to get your possession of a shoplifting device charge dismissed. One such program is the accelerated rehabilitation program.


The penalty for a violation of Connecticut General Statutes Section § 53a-127f, possession of a shoplifting device is a Class A misdemeanor for which you can face up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $2,000.

Criminal Defense for Possession of a Shoplifting Device

Possession of a shoplifting device is an A misdemeanor. As a result, you should contact an experienced Stamford shoplifting lawyer if you or a loved one has been accused of possession of a shoplifting device. Stamford criminal attorney Allan F. Friedman has over 30 years of experience fighting shoplifting allegations and other criminal charges related to larceny. Attorney Friedman will work hard to defend you against these allegations, try to have them dismissed, or significantly reduce the consequences.

For more information about defending shoplifting allegations, contact Stamford criminal lawyer Allan F. Friedman at The Law Offices of Allan F. Friedman to arrange your free, no-obligation, initial consultation. Our offices are located at 1100 Summer St #306, Stamford, CT 06905. Mr. Friedman can be reached 24/7 at (203) 357-5555, or you can contact us online for a prompt response.

Client Reviews
Attorney Friedman is the best!! He was extremely helpful and put me at ease with staying on top of my case leaving me with little to worry about. He is hardworking and was extremely flexible with my work schedule in setting up appointments and phone calls. His worth ethic, compassion, and fair price point really set him apart! Raul M.
Not only does Allan give exceptional legal advice, but he also takes the time to get to know his clients on an individual level. He is always available to answer questions, and he is truly dedicated to achieving a fair outcome in each case he is presented with. Knowledgeable, professional & compassionate. Highly recommend! Jennifer S.
Allan has been my personal attorney for over 10 years. He is creative, had working, dedicated, tenacious, and incredibly reliable. I highly recommend him, please don’t hesitate to contact him for service. George K.
I would highly recommend Attorney Allan F. Friedman to anyone seeking counsel in Connecticut. He represented our family's interests in a very professional, fair and effective way. I would give him my highest endorsement. Greg S.
Absolutely Exceptional Attorney. I give Allan a 10 out of 5 - he is that good and far beyond excellent!!! Allan handled my traffic matter with the highest level of professionalism, empathy and efficiency that anyone could ever ask for… Jose
This man literally saved my life! I had a criminal mischief and domestic charge along with a protective order put on me. Atty Friedman successfully got me into the required needed to have these charges dropped. Then came the felony protective order violation...Long story short I walked out of court today with all my charges nolled. Anonymous