(512) 476-4626
Embezzlement

Facing an embezzlement accusation in Texas is not simply a matter of “clearing things up” with an employer or business partner. It is a criminal allegation that can result in felony charges, prison time, and a permanent mark on a person’s record. For office managers, treasurers, and others entrusted with financial control, even the suspicion of misusing funds can cause immediate job loss, professional licensing issues, and irreparable harm to reputation—well before the case reaches a courtroom. Texas law treats embezzlement as a form of theft or fraud, with penalties that escalate sharply based on the amount involved and the circumstances of the alleged conduct

Texas Embezzlement Lawyer

Getting help from a criminal defense lawyer early is essential to address the state’s evidence, protect against self-incrimination, and prepare a defense that considers both the legal and practical consequences. In the sections that follow, The Law Office of Kevin Bennett explains how Texas law defines and prosecutes embezzlement, including the key legal terms, potential penalties, possible defenses, the critical stages of a case, and the role of the Austin embezzlement attorney in protecting the client’s rights and future.

Kevin Bennett always seeks to have honest and open communication with his clients. He knows this can be a difficult time that is made easier by knowing and understanding what is happening. Kevin Bennett personally handles every aspect of your case — nothing is farmed out to other attorneys.

Call The Law Office of Kevin Bennett today at (512) 476-4626 to set up a free consultation. Kevin Bennett represents people throughout Travis County, including Austin, West Lake Hills, Sunset Valley and Lago Vista.

Overview of Embezzlement in Texas

Back to Top

State Embezzlement Offenses

Theft Under Texas Penal Code Section 31.03 — This statute is the foundation for most embezzlement cases in Texas. It applies when someone unlawfully takes property from its rightful owner with the intent to keep it or otherwise deprive the owner of its use. In an embezzlement situation, this often means an office manager or treasurer who has lawful access to funds through their position but then uses that access to move the money into a personal account or otherwise use it without permission. The law makes it clear that the taking is unlawful if it happens without the owner’s effective consent, if the property is known to be stolen, or if it was represented by law enforcement as stolen. The penalties are determined by the value of the property. If the value is under $100, the charge is a Class C misdemeanor. It becomes a Class B misdemeanor if it is $100 or more but under $750, and a Class A misdemeanor if it is $750 or more but under $2,500. Any amount $2,500 or more can be a felony, with the degree increasing at higher value brackets, up to a first-degree felony for amounts of $300,000 or more. There are also enhancements if the accused was a public servant, if the victim was elderly or a nonprofit organization, or if the offense involved certain sensitive property such as ballots or firearms.

Theft of Service Under Texas Penal Code Section 31.04 — This provision addresses cases where the accused allegedly obtained services without paying for them. In an embezzlement context, this can include diverting paid services for personal use or holding onto leased property past the rental term without permission. For example, a treasurer might authorize company services for personal benefit without board approval. The law presumes intent to avoid payment if the person fails to pay after a demand notice, absconds without paying, or fails to return rented property within a specified time frame. Penalties are also value-based, starting at a Class C misdemeanor for less than $100 and reaching a first-degree felony if the value is $300,000 or more.

Theft by Deception and Effective Consent Under Texas Penal Code Section 31.01 — The statutory definitions in this section help explain when consent is not valid and what actions qualify as deception. Deception can include creating false records, failing to correct misleading impressions, or concealing key facts that would affect the owner’s decision to allow use of property. Effective consent is invalid if it is obtained through deception or coercion, given by someone without authority, or given by a person with diminished capacity. In an embezzlement case, such as a bookkeeper misleading company owners about account balances to cover up personal withdrawals, the taking becomes theft because the consent was never truly effective. The penalties for these cases track the main theft statute in Section 31.03, based on value and specific circumstances.

Credit Card or Debit Card Abuse Under Texas Penal Code Section 32.31 — Misuse of company-issued cards is a common form of embezzlement prosecuted under this law. It applies when a person uses a credit or debit card without consent, uses a fictitious or expired card, receives benefits from a card obtained unlawfully, or possesses cards without permission. For office managers or treasurers, examples include charging personal expenses to a business card without authorization. The base penalty is a state jail felony, but it can be enhanced to a third-degree felony if the offense is committed against an elderly individual.

Back to Top

Key Things a Jury Looks for in a Texas Embezzlement Case

Control or Possession Through a Position of Trust — Jurors often begin by examining how the accused came to have control over the funds or property in question. Under Texas Penal Code Section 31.03, this element is critical because embezzlement typically involves property that was lawfully entrusted to someone before it was allegedly misappropriated. In the case of an office manager or treasurer, the jury will look at whether that person’s job duties gave them access to bank accounts, cash handling, or financial records, and whether that access created the opportunity to commit the offense.

Unlawful Appropriation of Property — The prosecution must prove that the accused took or used the property without the effective consent of the owner, as defined in Texas Penal Code Section 31.01. Jurors will assess whether the person went beyond the scope of authority given, even if they initially had permission to handle the property.

Intent to Deprive the Owner — Texas law requires proof that the accused intended to deprive the owner of the property or service, meaning to withhold it permanently or for a time significant enough to diminish its value.

Value of the Property or Service — The monetary value determines the classification of the charge under Sections 31.03 and 31.04. Jurors will weigh appraisals, receipts, financial statements, and expert testimony to determine whether the value meets the threshold for the charged offense.

Evidence of Deception or Concealment — Actions like falsifying ledgers, creating fake invoices, or hiding financial transactions can be central to the prosecution’s case.

Back to Top

Defenses to Texas Embezzlement Charges

No Intent to Commit Embezzlement — Under Texas Penal Code Section 31.03, intent is a required element for any theft-based offense, including embezzlement. A defense strategy may focus on showing that the accused never meant to permanently keep the property or cause a loss to the owner.

Consent From the Owner Was Given — The statutory definition in Texas Penal Code Section 31.01 states that consent is effective when given by someone legally authorized to act for the owner, unless obtained through deception, coercion, or other disqualifying factors. A defense may establish that the accused had valid permission to use or transfer the property. In the context of a treasurer, this might involve showing that a board resolution, written policy, or verbal instruction granted the authority to take the action in question.

Mistake of Fact in an Embezzlement Case — Texas Penal Code Section 8.02 provides that a person is not guilty if they acted under a mistaken belief that negated the required mental state. In an embezzlement case, this could mean the accused believed in good faith that certain funds were allocated for discretionary use, or that a transaction had already been approved.

Challenging the Value of the Property or Funds — Because the degree of the offense under Sections 31.03 and 31.04 depends on the value of the property or service, challenging the valuation can be a critical defense. If the prosecution cannot prove the alleged amount beyond a reasonable doubt, the charge may be reduced to a lesser offense or dismissed.

No Control Over the Property in Question — The prosecution must establish that the accused had actual control over the funds or property before the alleged misappropriation occurred. If the evidence shows that the accused had no practical ability to access or direct the property, the jury may find that the essential element of possession was missing.

Back to Top

Federal Laws on Embezzlement

U.S. federal law contains several statutes targeting the theft, misuse, or conversion of public money, property, or records. These provisions apply to federal employees, contractors, and in some cases, state or local entities handling federal funds.

  • 18 USC § 641 – Prohibits stealing, embezzling, or knowingly converting U.S. government money, property, or records, and knowingly receiving such items when stolen or embezzled.
  • 18 USC § 642 – Forbids taking or concealing tools, implements, or materials used to counterfeit U.S. documents, instruments, or currency, whether blank, partially complete, or fully printed.
  • 18 USC § 643 – Requires federal officers, employees, or agents to account for all public money in their possession; failure to do so constitutes embezzlement.
  • 18 USC § 644 – Bars unauthorized individuals from receiving, depositing, loaning, or using public money from federal disbursing officers or agents in any unauthorized form.
  • 18 USC §§ 645–647 – Prohibits court officers, deputies, or employees from retaining or converting money obtained through their role, or failing to deposit funds as required.
  • 18 USC §§ 648–650 – Criminalizes loaning, using, or otherwise mishandling public money by custodians, depositaries, or the Treasurer of the United States.
  • 18 USC §§ 651–653 – Outlaws false vouchers, underpayments, or converting public funds for personal use by federal disbursing officers or those acting in that role.
  • 18 USC § 666 – Addresses theft, embezzlement, or bribery involving $5,000+ from state, local, or organizational entities receiving $10,000+ in federal funds annually.

If the amount is more than $1,000 (or $5,000 for §666), it’s a felony with up to 10 years in prison and fines. Smaller amounts are misdemeanors with up to 1 year in prison and fines.

Back to Top

Role of an Austin Embezzlement Attorney

Conducting a Detailed Financial Investigation — The lawyer will obtain and examine bank statements, accounting records, invoices, and internal reports to identify inconsistencies, missing documentation, or errors that may weaken the prosecution’s theory of unlawful appropriation.

Challenging the State’s Valuation — Because Texas Penal Code Sections 31.03 and 31.04 base penalties on value, the lawyer will scrutinize how the state calculated the amount. This includes questioning appraisals, depreciation, aggregation of amounts, and whether certain transactions were improperly included.

Exposing Weaknesses in the Evidence of Intent — The attorney will look for proof that the client lacked intent to deprive the owner permanently, such as evidence of planned repayment, accounting misunderstandings, or authorization from a supervisor or board.

Negotiating for Reduced or Dismissed Charges — Using findings from the investigation, the lawyer will present evidence to prosecutors that challenges key elements, pushing for dismissal or a reduction to a lesser offense.

Defending in Court with Precision — If trial becomes necessary, the lawyer will cross-examine witnesses, challenge questionable documents, and argue to the jury why the prosecution failed to prove every element of embezzlement beyond a reasonable doubt.

Back to Top

Frequently Asked Questions About Texas Embezzlement Laws

What is the legal definition of embezzlement in Texas?
In Texas, embezzlement is generally prosecuted under theft statutes, such as Penal Code Section 31.03, when someone lawfully entrusted with property misappropriates it for personal use without effective consent, intending to deprive the owner permanently or significantly.

Can embezzlement charges in Texas be a felony?
Yes. In Texas, embezzlement becomes a felony if the value of property or funds meets statutory thresholds in Penal Code Sections 31.03 or 31.04. Higher amounts and aggravating factors can result in second-degree or first-degree felony charges.

How does Texas law punish embezzlement from an employer?
Punishment depends on the property’s value and any aggravating factors under Texas Penal Code Section 31.03. Penalties range from misdemeanors to first-degree felonies. Public servants, nonprofit victim cases, and elderly victim cases may result in enhanced sentencing under the statute.

Can embezzlement in Texas include services, not just money?
Yes. Under Texas Penal Code Section 31.04, theft of service can include diverting paid services or resources for personal gain without authorization. This type of embezzlement carries penalties based on the value of the services involved.

Does paying the money back stop Texas embezzlement charges?
No. Repayment does not automatically end an embezzlement case under Texas law. However, it can be a factor in plea negotiations or sentencing. Prosecutors may still pursue charges if the statutory elements of theft or fraud are met.

Is misuse of a company credit card considered embezzlement in Texas?
It can be. Misuse of a company-issued credit or debit card without consent is typically prosecuted under Texas Penal Code Section 32.31. If done for personal gain, it can meet the definition of embezzlement-related theft or fraud.

Can an office manager be charged with embezzlement in Texas?
Yes. If an office manager uses their position of trust to unlawfully take company funds or property without consent, Texas law allows prosecution under theft, theft of service, or fraud statutes, depending on the specific facts and evidence.

Back to Top

Additional References

Austin Texas — Chapter 31 Theft — This source contains the full text of Chapter 31 of the Texas Penal Code, which addresses theft-related offenses. It defines terms like deception, deprive, and effective consent, outlines various theft crimes including embezzlement, theft of service, and theft of trade secrets, and details the penalties based on the value or nature of the stolen property or service.

Chapter 31 — Embezzlement and Theft — United States House of Representatives — This section of the U.S. Code outlines federal laws related to embezzlement and theft. It lists statutory provisions under Title 18, Chapter 31, including offenses involving public money, property, court officers, custodians, disbursing officers, and federally funded programs.

Criminal Resource Manual: Embezzlement — United States Department of Justice — This archived U.S. Department of Justice resource explains the legal definition and elements of embezzlement under federal law. It distinguishes embezzlement from larceny and outlines the elements required to prove the offense under 18 USC § 666.

Investigative Reports — Austin Texas — This page from the City of Austin provides access to investigative reports and complaints issued by the city auditor’s office. Reports cover topics such as misuse of city resources, fraud, waste, and conflicts of interest.

Back to Top

Lawyer for Embezzlement in Austin, Texas

If you or someone you know has been charged with Embezzlement, then it’s imperative that you contact an experienced criminal defense attorney. Find that attorney today with Kevin Bennett. Kevin Bennett is an experienced criminal defense attorney who has represented numerous people accused of Embezzlement.

The Law Office of Kevin Bennett accepts clients throughout the greater Austin area including Lago Vista, West Lake Hills, Pflugerville, and Rollingwood. Call Kevin Bennett today at (512) 476-4626 to schedule a free consultation. He can do a case evaluation to discover the best legal option for your case.