Montana Code Annotated

Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-303 (2026)

Offender's Interest In The Property

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MT-LEGleg.mt.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

TITLE 45. CRIMES

CHAPTER 6. OFFENSES AGAINST PROPERTY

Part 3. Theft and Related Offenses

Offender's Interest In The Property

45-6-303. Offender's interest in the property. (1) It is no defense to a charge of theft of property that the offender has an interest therein when the owner also has an interest to which the offender is not entitled.

(2) It is no defense that theft was from the offender's spouse, except that misappropriation of household and personal effects or other property normally accessible to both spouses is theft only if it occurs after the parties have ceased living together.

History: En. 94-6-306 by Sec. 1, Ch. 513, L. 1973; R.C.M. 1947, 94-6-306.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1986–2007 · leading case: State v. Haack, 713 P.2d 1001 (Mont. 1986).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Haack, 713 P.2d 1001 (Mont. 1986). · cites it 58× “The appellant, State of Montana, argues that § 45-6-303, MCA, makes it perfectly clear that a joint tenant may be convicted of theft of joint tenancy property.”

State v. Debus, 2002 MT 307 (Mont. 2002). · cites it 10× “" The District Court found that Virtual was a dissolved corporation. The title of a dissolved corporation's property does not transfer upon dissolution, rather the corporation continues its corporate existence, and the property remains property of the corporate entity until it…”

State v. Krinitt, 823 P.2d 848 (Mont. 1991). · cites it 7× “Was the money taken “property normally accessible to both spouses” under § 45-6-303(2), MCA? Perry Krinitt (Krinitt) married Florence Krinitt (Mrs.”

State v. Ramsey, 2007 MT 31 (Mont. 2007). · cites it 5× “Second, Windy’s purported consent provides no lawful defense to theft under Montana law in any case, as § 45-6-303(2), MCA, states that “[i]t is no defense that theft was from the offender’s spouse.”

State v. Kuntz, 875 P.2d 1034 (Mont. 1994). · cites it 7× “Section 45-6-303(1), MCA(1991), further states that “[i]t is no defense to a charge of theft of property that the offender has an interest therein when the owner also has an interest to which the offender is not entitled.”

State v. Kane, 1999 MT 337 (Mont. 1999). · cites it 8× “¶6 Section 45-6-301, MCA, provides the following: (1) a person commits the offense of theft when he purposely or knowingly obtains or exerts unauthorized control over the property of the owner and: (a) has the purpose of depriving the owner of the property; (b) purposely or…”

— Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-303(1) — 4 cases

State v. Debus, 2002 MT 307 (Mont. 2002). “" The District Court found that Virtual was a dissolved corporation. The title of a dissolved corporation's property does not transfer upon dissolution, rather the corporation continues its corporate existence, and the property remains property of the corporate entity until it…”

State v. Haack, 713 P.2d 1001 (Mont. 1986). “The appellant, State of Montana, argues that § 45-6-303, MCA, makes it perfectly clear that a joint tenant may be convicted of theft of joint tenancy property.”

State v. Kuntz, 875 P.2d 1034 (Mont. 1994). “Section 45-6-303(1), MCA(1991), further states that “[i]t is no defense to a charge of theft of property that the offender has an interest therein when the owner also has an interest to which the offender is not entitled.”

State v. Kane, 1999 MT 337 (Mont. 1999). “¶6 Section 45-6-301, MCA, provides the following: (1) a person commits the offense of theft when he purposely or knowingly obtains or exerts unauthorized control over the property of the owner and: (a) has the purpose of depriving the owner of the property; (b) purposely or…”

— Mont. Code Ann. § 45-6-303(2) — 2 cases

State v. Krinitt, 823 P.2d 848 (Mont. 1991). “Was the money taken “property normally accessible to both spouses” under § 45-6-303(2), MCA? Perry Krinitt (Krinitt) married Florence Krinitt (Mrs.”

State v. Ramsey, 2007 MT 31 (Mont. 2007). “Second, Windy’s purported consent provides no lawful defense to theft under Montana law in any case, as § 45-6-303(2), MCA, states that “[i]t is no defense that theft was from the offender’s spouse.”

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.