Search found 1 match

by rickb308
Wed Dec 29, 2004 10:55 am
Forum: Goals for 2007
Topic: Background checks
Replies: 17
Views: 6631

LarryArnold wrote:
Warhorse545 wrote:Petty theft charges as one example.
Indictment for any offense more serious than that will also result in immediate license suspension, with revocation if you're convicted. That should cover even the pettiest theft.
Not trying to pick nits, but, for a non-CHL, petty theft may not even show up during a background check. Depends on the case & disposition of the case.

Many, many moons ago, I used to catch shoplifters for a living.
'86-'88. Joske's, Bloomingdale's, & Sears.
No less than 3 cases a month. (3 was the magic number to keep your job)
Only one was a Class "C" misdemeanor. One was a Class "A", and a few felony credit card frauds.
Never spent a minute in court on ANY case. Never knew the disposition of any case. Was never contacted by ANY ADA. Every one of them but the class C went out of the store in handcuffs to a waiting squad car. (PD was called on EVERY case, Corp. policy - liability issues) Class C was issued a ticket on the spot by the PD and released.
Looking over the code, looks like they have changed some "thresholds":
(1) a Class C misdemeanor if the value of the property
stolen is less than:
(A) $50; (used to be $20. My one "C" case was a $10 pair of underwear.
$20/Class B was the "magic" number that actually counted towards your 3 cases/month)
(2) a Class B misdemeanor if:
(A) the value of the property stolen is:

(i) $50 or more but less than $500; (used to be $20 - $750)(Over $750 was the "brass ring" case every store investigator shot for. Tough when dealing with clothing)
(3) a Class A misdemeanor if the value of the property
stolen is $500 or more but less than $1,500;


Credit card fraud/theft is now a state jail felony.
Like I said, never once did I spend a minute in court on any case.
How many of those cases WON'T show up on a non-CHL background check, but how many will get your CHL yanked by the arresting PD?

Return to “Background checks”