(1) Except as otherwise provided in KRS 217.181, a person is guilty of theft by
unlawful taking or disposition when he or she unlawfully:
(a) Takes or exercises control over movable property of another with intent to
deprive him or her thereof; or
(b) Obtains immovable property of another or any interest therein with intent to
benefit himself or herself or another not entitled thereto.
(2) Theft by unlawful taking or disposition is a Class B misdemeanor unless:
(a) The property is a firearm (regardless of the value of the firearm), in which
case it is a Class D felony;
(b) The property is anhydrous ammonia (regardless of the value of the ammonia),
in which case it is a Class D felony unless it is proven that the person violated
this section with the intent to manufacture methamphetamine in violation of
KRS 218A.1432, in which case it is a Class B felony for the first offense and
a Class A felony for each subsequent offense;
(c) The property is one (1) or more controlled substances valued collectively at
less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000), in which case it is a Class D felony;
(d) The value of the property is five hundred dollars ($500) or more but less than
one thousand dollars ($1,000), in which case it is a Class A misdemeanor;
(e) The value of the property is one thousand dollars ($1,000) or more but less
than ten thousand dollars ($10,000), in which case it is a Class D felony;
(f) The person has three (3) or more convictions under paragraph (d) of this
subsection within the last five (5) years, in which case it is a Class D felony.
The five (5) year period shall be measured from the dates on which the
offenses occurred for which the judgments of conviction were entered;
(g) The value of the property is ten thousand dollars ($10,000) or more but less
than one million dollars ($1,000,000), in which case it is a Class C felony;
(h) The value of the property is one million dollars ($1,000,000) or more but less
than ten million dollars ($10,000,000), in which case it is a Class B felony;
(i) The value of the property is ten million dollars ($10,000,000) or more, in
which case it is a Class B felony; or
(j) The offense occurs during a declared emergency as defined by KRS 39A.020
arising from a natural or man-made disaster, within the area covered by the
emergency declaration, and within the area impacted by the disaster, in which
case the person shall be charged one (1) level higher than the level otherwise
specified in this subsection.
(3) Any person convicted under subsection (2)(i) of this section shall not be released on
probation or parole until he or she has served at least fifty percent (50%) of the
sentence imposed, any statute to the contrary notwithstanding.
(4) If any person commits two (2) or more separate offenses of theft by unlawful taking
or disposition within one (1) year, the offenses may be combined and treated as a
single offense, and the value of the property in each offense may be aggregated for
the purpose of determining the appropriate charge. Offenses committed in different
jurisdictions within the Commonwealth may be combined pursuant to this
subsection and tried in any jurisdiction in which venue would be proper for at least
one (1) of the offenses. A defendant shall not be tried in more than one (1)
jurisdiction for the same offense or offenses.
Effective: July 15, 2024
History: Amended 2024 Ky. Acts ch. 174, sec. 51, effective July 15, 2024. -- Amended
2022 Ky. Acts ch. 151, sec. 12, effective July 14, 2022. -- Amended 2021 Ky. Acts
ch. 66, sec. 8, effective June 29, 2021. -- Amended 2013 Ky. Acts ch. 82, sec. 1,
effective June 25, 2013. -- Amended 2009 Ky. Acts ch. 106, sec. 6, effective June
25, 2009. -- Amended 2000 Ky. Acts ch. 233, sec. 8, effective July 14, 2000. --
Amended 1998 Ky. Acts ch. 301, sec. 9, effective July 15, 1998. -- Amended 1994
Ky. Acts ch. 314, sec. 2, effective July 15, 1994. – Amended 1992 Ky. Acts ch. 451,
sec. 1, effective July 14, 1992. -- Created 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 119 , effective
January 1, 1975.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
128
cases (
36 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case:
Lloyd v. Commonwealth, 324 S.W.3d 384 (Ky. 2010).
Lloyd v. Commonwealth, 324 S.W.3d 384 (Ky. 2010).
· cites it 11× “" Subsection two of KRS 514.030 provided that theft by unlawful taking was a "Class A misdemeanor unless the value of the property is three hundred dollars ($300) or more, in which case it is a Class D felony.”
Ewing v. California, 538 U.S. 11 (2003).
· cites it 2× “Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 514.030 (2) (Lexis Supp.”
Commonwealth v. Day, 599 S.W.2d 166 (Ky. 1980).
· cites it 11× “110(2), the Howe rule was not incorporated into KRS 514.030. The instructions given by the trial court were justified by the evidence presented to the jury and were an accurate statement of law in the case.”
Wilson v. Commonwealth, 438 S.W.3d 345 (Ky. 2014).
· cites it 5× “Acknowledging that over a century later Fair was being prosecuted under the Penal Code rather than common law, the Court noted that the commentary to KRS 514.030 states that it “is intended to include all statutory and common law offenses involving unlawful appropriation of…”
Fair v. Commonwealth, 652 S.W.2d 864 (Ky. 1983).
· cites it 6× “" Grand and petit larceny are specifically identified in the commentary as offenses intended to be included in KRS 514.”
Cooley v. Commonwealth, 821 S.W.2d 90 (Ky. 1991).
· cites it 7× “2d 828 (1984), the Court examined the relationship between KRS 514.030(1)(a), a statute which proscribes theft by unlawful taking, and KRS 514.”
Hayes v. Commonwealth, 698 S.W.2d 827 (Ky. 1985).
· cites it 4× “See 1974 Commentary to KRS 514.030. As codified the crime is now theft by unlawful taking.”
Kotila v. Commonwealth, 114 S.W.3d 226 (Ky. 2003).
· cites it 2× “KRS 514.030(2). How could the officer know that the value of the property that he suspected was stolen was less than $300.”
King v. Grecco, 111 S.W.3d 877 (Ky. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 3× “with intent to convert to his own use timber growing upon the land of another without legal right” and specifically provides that any of its penalties shall be in addition to those found in KRS 514.030. KRS 514.030 prohibits theft by unlawful taking, which occurs when a person…”
Meece v. Feldman Lumber Co., 290 S.W.3d 631 (Ky. 2009).
· cites it 4× “260 (which had been repealed) to the analogous KRS 514.030. [16] Other than adding punitive damages, the only other real change in the common law rule on damages by the 1956 statute was the substitution of the language of the qualifier (innocent versus willful trespasser), to…”
State v. Gentry, 538 S.W.3d 413 (Tenn. 2017).
“§ 28-511 ; Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 514.030 ; State v. Kosch , 444 N.”
Desai v. Charter Commc'ns, LLC, 381 F. Supp. 3d 774 (W.D. Ky. 2019).
· cites it 2× “19 (2018); Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030. The Court notes that Charter objected at trial to application of the statutory definition of theft (which formed part of the Cetrulo model instruction on defamation per se), and its counsel admitted that no witness had referred to Plaintiffs'…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030(1) — 4 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030(1)(a) — 15 cases
Cooley v. Commonwealth, 821 S.W.2d 90 (Ky. 1991).
“2d 828 (1984), the Court examined the relationship between KRS 514.030(1)(a), a statute which proscribes theft by unlawful taking, and KRS 514.”
Commonwealth v. Day, 599 S.W.2d 166 (Ky. 1980).
“110(2), the Howe rule was not incorporated into KRS 514.030. The instructions given by the trial court were justified by the evidence presented to the jury and were an accurate statement of law in the case.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030(2) — 8 cases
Kotila v. Commonwealth, 114 S.W.3d 226 (Ky. 2003).
“KRS 514.030(2). How could the officer know that the value of the property that he suspected was stolen was less than $300.”
Lloyd v. Commonwealth, 324 S.W.3d 384 (Ky. 2010).
“" Subsection two of KRS 514.030 provided that theft by unlawful taking was a "Class A misdemeanor unless the value of the property is three hundred dollars ($300) or more, in which case it is a Class D felony.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030(2)(a) — 2 cases
Wilson v. Commonwealth, 438 S.W.3d 345 (Ky. 2014).
“Acknowledging that over a century later Fair was being prosecuted under the Penal Code rather than common law, the Court noted that the commentary to KRS 514.030 states that it “is intended to include all statutory and common law offenses involving unlawful appropriation of…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030(2)(d) — 6 cases
Wilson v. Commonwealth, 438 S.W.3d 345 (Ky. 2014).
“Acknowledging that over a century later Fair was being prosecuted under the Penal Code rather than common law, the Court noted that the commentary to KRS 514.030 states that it “is intended to include all statutory and common law offenses involving unlawful appropriation of…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030(2)(e) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030(2)(g) — 3 cases
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030(a) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030(g) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030(l)(a) — 17 cases
Commonwealth v. Day, 599 S.W.2d 166 (Ky. 1980).
“110(2), the Howe rule was not incorporated into KRS 514.030. The instructions given by the trial court were justified by the evidence presented to the jury and were an accurate statement of law in the case.”
Cooley v. Commonwealth, 821 S.W.2d 90 (Ky. 1991).
“2d 828 (1984), the Court examined the relationship between KRS 514.030(1)(a), a statute which proscribes theft by unlawful taking, and KRS 514.”
Wilson v. Commonwealth, 438 S.W.3d 345 (Ky. 2014).
“Acknowledging that over a century later Fair was being prosecuted under the Penal Code rather than common law, the Court noted that the commentary to KRS 514.030 states that it “is intended to include all statutory and common law offenses involving unlawful appropriation of…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030(l)(a)(2) — 1 case
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 514.030(l)(b) — 1 case
King v. Grecco, 111 S.W.3d 877 (Ky. Ct. App. 2002).
“with intent to convert to his own use timber growing upon the land of another without legal right” and specifically provides that any of its penalties shall be in addition to those found in KRS 514.030. KRS 514.030 prohibits theft by unlawful taking, which occurs when a person…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.