Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146 (2026)
Theft of property - Conduct involving merchandise
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) For purposes of § 39-14-103, a person commits theft of property if the person, with the intent to deprive a merchant of the stated price of merchandise, knowingly commits any of the following acts:
- (1) Conceals the merchandise;
- (2) Removes, takes possession of, or causes the removal of merchandise;
- (3) Alters, transfers or removes any price marking, or any other marking which aids in determining value affixed to the merchandise;
- (4) Transfers the merchandise from one (1) container to another;
- (5) Causes the cash register or other sales recording device to reflect less than the merchant's stated price for the merchandise;
- (6) Removes, destroys, deactivates, or evades any component of an anti-shoplifting or inventory control device to commit or facilitate a theft;
- (7) Uses any artifice, instrument, container, device, or other article to commit or facilitate a theft; or
- (8) Activates or interferes with a fire alarm system to commit or facilitate a theft.
- (b) In a theft prosecution under this section, unless applicable, the state is not required to prove that the defendant obtained or exercised control over the merchandise as required in a prosecution under § 39-14-103.
- (c) Notwithstanding any other law, a fifth or subsequent conviction in a two-year period shall be punished one (1) classification higher than provided by § 39-14-105, and subject to a fine of not less than three hundred dollars ($300) nor more than the maximum fine established for the appropriate offense classification.
Amended by 2017 Tenn. Acts, ch. 184,s 2, eff. 7/1/2017.
Amended by 2017 Tenn. Acts, ch. 184,s 1, eff. 7/1/2017.
Acts 1991, ch. 237, § 1.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1995–2025 · leading case: State of Tennessee v. Christine Caudle, 388 S.W.3d 273 (Tenn. 2012).
State of Tennessee v. Christine Caudle, 388 S.W.3d 273 (Tenn. 2012). “§ 39-14-146, both of which are Class E felonies.”
State of Tennessee v. Antonio Henderson, 531 S.W.3d 687 (Tenn. 2017). “5 (quoting Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146 (a)(1)-(2) (2006)).”
State Ex Rel. Newsom v. Biggers, 911 S.W.2d 715 (Tenn. 1995). “Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-14-146 (1991). 2 . 840 S.”
State of Tennessee v. Tray Turner (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146 . It is the use of violence or fear that elevates theft to robbery.”
State of Tennessee v. Kandi Sue Gaines (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017). “See T.C.A. § 39-14-146 (2014) (amended 2017) (theft of property involving merchandise).”
State of Tennessee v. Abbie Leann Welch (Tenn. 2020). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146 (c). In short, Judge McMullen posited that “these amendments evince an understanding that shoplifting is a petty, non-violent property offense that should not be punished as harshly as burglary.”
State of Tennessee v. William C. Sutton (Tenn. Crim. App. 2025). “] -11- Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146 (a)(1)-(2), (7).”
State of Tennessee v. Abbie Leann Welch (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019). “See T.C.A. § 39-14-146(c). We also find this argument unpersuasive.”
State of Tennessee v. Curtis Logan Lawson (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019). “See T.C.A. §§ 39-14-146; -405. - 14 - does not check the trespass list even when the individuals provide identification, and instead takes action only if the individual commits some offense such as shoplifting.”
State of Tennessee v. Antonio Crenshaw (Tenn. Crim. App. 2015). “Crenshaw argues that because the theft in this case involved theft of property from a merchant, the trial court should have instructed the jury on the offense of Theft of Property—Conduct Involving Merchandise (also known as Shoplifting) in Tennessee Code Annotated section…”
State of Tennessee v. Errol Shields (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017). “T.C.A. § 39-14-146 (2014). Theft of property valued at more than $500 but less than $1,000 is a Class E felony.”
State of Tennessee v. Lavelle Moore (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146 . To sustain the defendant’s Class E felony conviction, the State also had to prove the value of the property was over $500.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146(a) — 3 cases
State of Tennessee v. William C. Sutton (Tenn. Crim. App. 2025). “] -11- Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146 (a)(1)-(2), (7).”
State of Tennessee v. Mark Walker (Tenn. Crim. App. 2002).
State of Tennessee v. Renitra Harlen (Tenn. Crim. App. 2013).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146(a)(1) — 3 cases
State of Tennessee v. Tray Turner (Tenn. Crim. App. 2012). “Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146 . It is the use of violence or fear that elevates theft to robbery.”
State of Tennessee v. Kandi Sue Gaines (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017). “See T.C.A. § 39-14-146 (2014) (amended 2017) (theft of property involving merchandise).”
State of Tennessee v. Katayoun Mohammadi Jaffarian (Tenn. Crim. App. 2010).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146(a)(2) — 1 case
State of Tennessee v. Kandi Sue Gaines (Tenn. Crim. App. 2017). “See T.C.A. § 39-14-146 (2014) (amended 2017) (theft of property involving merchandise).”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146(c) — 3 cases
State of Tennessee v. Abbie Leann Welch (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019). “See T.C.A. § 39-14-146(c). We also find this argument unpersuasive.”
State of Tennessee v. Abbie Leann Welch (Tenn. 2020). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-146 (c). In short, Judge McMullen posited that “these amendments evince an understanding that shoplifting is a petty, non-violent property offense that should not be punished as harshly as burglary.”
State of Tennessee v. Curtis Logan Lawson (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019). “See T.C.A. §§ 39-14-146; -405. - 14 - does not check the trespass list even when the individuals provide identification, and instead takes action only if the individual commits some offense such as shoplifting.”
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.