A serial dining and dashing case in Williamsburg has captured widespread attention and raised important questions about New York’s bail laws. According to Brooklyn News 12, a 34-year-old woman has been arrested at least seven times for theft of services in New York after allegedly refusing to pay at restaurants throughout the neighborhood, yet continues to be released each time despite prosecutors repeatedly requesting bail.
Why Clients Trust Us
Our firm was consulted by News 12 to explain the legal complexities of this case and why New York’s bail laws make it difficult to detain someone charged with repeated theft of services offenses. At the Law Offices of Robert Tsigler, PLLC, named one of the 10 Best Immigration Law Firms by the American Institute of Legal Counsel, we bring decades of experience to both criminal defense and explaining New York’s complex criminal justice system.
As Attorney Robert Tsigler explained to News 12, theft of services is “a non-violent misdemeanor that doesn’t put the community at risk,” which means that under New York’s current bail laws, most misdemeanors simply aren’t eligible for bail. Understanding these laws is crucial whether you’re facing charges or trying to understand how the criminal justice system works.
What Is Theft of Services Under New York Law
Theft of services is defined under New York Penal Law § 165.15. This statute makes it a crime to obtain services that you know are available only for compensation by using deception, false tokens, or by absconding without payment.
The law recognizes that services have value just like physical property. When someone obtains services through fraud or by simply leaving without paying, they’re depriving the service provider of compensation they’re entitled to receive. However, as the Williamsburg case demonstrates, how the law categorizes these offenses has significant implications for bail eligibility and prosecution.
New York’s theft of services law covers a broad range of conduct: obtaining services by deception or false pretenses, using a false token or device to obtain services, obtaining telecommunications or cable services through unauthorized means, or absconding without payment after receiving services.
The key element that distinguishes theft of services from a simple civil dispute over payment is intent. The prosecution must prove that the defendant intended to avoid payment from the beginning, not that they simply ended up unable to pay or dissatisfied with the service received.
Why New York’s Bail Laws Matter in Theft Cases
The Williamsburg case illustrates a critical aspect of New York’s bail reform laws that many people find frustrating. Despite being arrested seven times for similar conduct, the defendant continues to be released because theft of services charges typically don’t meet the legal criteria for bail under current New York law.
Understanding Bail Reform
New York implemented significant bail reform in recent years. Under current law, most misdemeanor charges are not eligible for cash bail, meaning defendants must be released on their own recognizance or under supervised release conditions. The reform was designed to address the problem of people being held in jail simply because they couldn’t afford bail, not because they posed a danger to the community.
However, this creates situations like the Williamsburg case, where someone can be repeatedly arrested for the same type of offense and continue to be released each time. According to News 12, prosecutors in that case asked judges multiple times to set bail, but each time the judge released the defendant under supervision because the charges didn’t meet the legal standard for bail.
The Two Requirements for Bail on Repeat Misdemeanors
As attorney Jen Peters explained to News 12, for prosecutors to secure bail on repeat misdemeanor charges, they must meet two specific requirements. First, they need to show that a person has been arrested for a misdemeanor, been released on that misdemeanor under non-monetary conditions, and then been arrested again on a misdemeanor. Critically, both of those misdemeanors must have “identifiable harm to a person or property.”
Second, prosecutors must also demonstrate that the defendant is a flight risk.
Why “Services” vs. “Property” Matters
This is where theft of services cases become particularly challenging for prosecutors seeking bail. As Attorney Tsigler explained to News 12, under the law, restaurant meals are considered a service, not property. This legal distinction makes it much tougher for prosecutors to argue that a business is being harmed in a way that fits the legal definition of “identifiable harm to property” needed to qualify for bail.
This technical legal distinction means that even repeated theft of services offenses may not meet the statutory requirements for bail, despite the obvious harm being done to restaurant owners and the community’s frustration with repeat offenders.
Degrees and Penalties for Theft of Services
New York law categorizes theft of services into three degrees based on the value of the services stolen.
Theft of Services in the Third Degree
This is a Class A misdemeanor and applies when the value of services stolen exceeds $1,000. A Class A misdemeanor carries potential penalties of up to one year in jail, probation, fines, and a permanent criminal record. However, as the Williamsburg case demonstrates, actually being detained on these charges is difficult under current bail laws, even for repeat offenders.
For first-time offenders, jail time is rarely imposed. The conviction still appears on background checks, which can affect employment and housing opportunities.
Theft of Services in the Second Degree
This is a Class E felony and applies when the value exceeds $3,000. As a felony, this charge is considerably more serious and bail may be more readily available. Conviction can result in up to four years in state prison, though sentences vary based on criminal history and other factors.
Theft of Services in the First Degree
This is a Class D felony and applies when the value exceeds $10,000. This carries potential penalties of up to seven years in state prison. Given the substantial value involved, these cases often involve systematic fraud or repeated offenses over time.
What Would Make It a Felony?
As Attorney Tsigler explained to News 12, to elevate typical dining and dashing charges to a felony level, certain additional elements would need to be present. If someone used a stolen credit card to attempt payment, that could result in felony charges. Alternatively, if someone purchased an item over $1,000 – such as an expensive bottle of wine – and then refused to pay, “they could be charged with grand larceny, which is a felony,” Tsigler noted.
This distinction is important because felony charges are generally bail-eligible, unlike the misdemeanor theft of services charges that dominate cases like the Williamsburg situation.
Common Examples of Theft of Services
While the Williamsburg case involves restaurant dining, theft of services charges can arise in many different contexts.
Restaurant and Hospitality Services
“Dining and dashing” is the most commonly known form – ordering and consuming food and beverages at a restaurant and then leaving without paying. According to News 12’s reporting, in the Williamsburg case, the defendant allegedly ordered “a fantastic array of food” at multiple restaurants, sometimes staying for hours even after being confronted by staff. This also extends to hotel services and bar tabs that are deliberately avoided.
Transportation Services
Using public transportation without paying the required fare constitutes theft of services. This includes jumping subway turnstiles, boarding buses without payment, using fake or fraudulent fare cards, or exiting taxis and rideshares without paying.
Utility and Communication Services
Illegally tapping into cable or satellite television services, tampering with electric or gas meters to avoid charges, and using telecommunication services through fraudulent means all constitute theft of services under New York law.
Entertainment and Event Access
Sneaking into concerts, sporting events, movie theaters, or other entertainment venues without paying admission can result in theft of services charges. Similarly, accessing streaming services, software, or digital content through fraudulent means may constitute theft of services.
Contractor and Professional Services
Hiring a contractor, attorney, accountant, or other professional and then refusing to pay after the work is completed can lead to theft of services charges if prosecution can prove the individual never intended to pay. However, genuine disputes over quality or completion are typically civil matters rather than criminal ones.
What the Prosecution Must Prove
To convict someone of theft of services, the prosecution must prove several elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
Obtaining Services
The prosecution must show that the defendant actually obtained services that ordinarily require compensation. In dining and dashing cases, this is usually straightforward – the restaurant provided food and beverage service.
Knowledge That Compensation Was Required
The defendant must have known that the services were only available for compensation. This is why theft of services doesn’t apply to situations where someone reasonably believed the service was free or complimentary.
Method of Obtaining Services
The prosecution must prove that the defendant obtained the services through deception or false pretenses about their intent or ability to pay, use of a false token or device, or by absconding without payment after receiving services.
In the Williamsburg case, according to News 12, the defendant allegedly showed up “dressed well, sitting alone, ordering big meals and then refusing to pay.” This pattern of conduct suggests deliberate deception about the intent to pay.
Intent to Avoid Payment
Perhaps most importantly, the prosecution must prove that the defendant intended to avoid payment. A pattern of repeated similar conduct, as alleged in the Williamsburg case with at least seven arrests, can help prosecutors establish this intent element.
The Challenge of Repeat Offenders Under Bail Reform
The Williamsburg case perfectly illustrates one of the most controversial aspects of New York’s bail reform: what happens when someone repeatedly commits the same offense but the charges don’t meet the legal criteria for bail?
Pattern Behavior vs. Legal Standards
From a common-sense perspective, someone who has been arrested seven times for the same type of conduct clearly demonstrates a pattern that suggests continued offending. Restaurant owners throughout Williamsburg have been warning each other about the defendant, with her pictures circulating on social media. Some establishments are even considering restraining orders.
However, the legal standard for bail doesn’t focus on frustration or pattern behavior alone. It requires specific showings: that the charges involve identifiable harm to person or property, and that the defendant is a flight risk. As Attorney Tsigler explained, because restaurant meals are legally classified as services rather than property, meeting that first requirement becomes very difficult.
Supervised Release Instead of Bail
When bail cannot be set, courts typically release defendants under supervised release. This means they must check in regularly with a supervision program, maintain a residence, appear for all court dates, and comply with other conditions. However, as the Williamsburg case shows, supervised release doesn’t always prevent continued offending.
The challenge is that violating supervised release conditions can itself be grounds for detention, but only if the defendant actually violates those conditions. Simply being arrested for new similar charges doesn’t automatically result in detention if those new charges also aren’t bail-eligible.
What Prosecutors Can Do
While prosecutors in the Williamsburg case have repeatedly asked for bail, there are other prosecutorial strategies available. They can request more restrictive supervised release conditions, seek higher charges if the facts support them (such as if stolen credit cards were used or high-value items were involved), consolidate multiple charges to increase the total value and potentially reach felony thresholds, or work with affected businesses to pursue civil remedies like restraining orders.
According to News 12, court records show the defendant in the Williamsburg case owes more than $40,000 in back rent, which could potentially be relevant to flight risk arguments or other aspects of the prosecution.
Additional Consequences Beyond Criminal Penalties
Even when someone isn’t detained on bail, theft of services convictions carry significant consequences.
Employment Barriers
Theft of services convictions appear on background checks that most employers conduct. Because theft crimes involve dishonesty, they’re particularly concerning to employers in positions involving money handling, access to property, or positions of trust. Many professional fields view theft convictions very seriously.
Professional Licensing Issues
For anyone holding or seeking professional licenses, theft convictions can result in denial of licensure or disciplinary action. Licensing boards often view crimes involving dishonesty as particularly serious.
Housing Difficulties
Landlords routinely conduct criminal background checks. A theft conviction can make it very difficult to rent an apartment, particularly in competitive rental markets like New York City. Ironically, in the Williamsburg case, court records show the defendant already owes over $40,000 in back rent, suggesting housing instability may already be an issue.
Immigration Consequences
For non-citizens, theft of services can have severe immigration consequences. Theft crimes are considered crimes involving moral turpitude (CIMT), which can make someone inadmissible or deportable. Even lawful permanent residents can face removal proceedings based on theft convictions.
Civil Liability
In addition to criminal prosecution, service providers can pursue civil action to recover the value of services, plus potentially additional damages and attorney’s fees. In some jurisdictions, civil statutes allow for treble damages (three times the actual damages) in theft cases.
Community Consequences
As the Williamsburg case shows, repeat offenders can become well-known in their communities. Restaurant staff throughout the neighborhood have been sharing the defendant’s picture and warning each other. This type of community response can effectively bar someone from numerous establishments, even without formal legal action.
Common Defenses to Theft of Services Charges
If you’re facing theft of services charges, several potential defenses might apply depending on your circumstances.
Lack of Intent
The most common and often most effective defense is that you didn’t have the intent to defraud or avoid payment. Perhaps you fully intended to pay but circumstances prevented it – your card was declined unexpectedly, you realized you’d forgotten your wallet, or a genuine emergency required you to leave immediately. If the prosecution cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you intended to avoid payment from the beginning, they cannot secure a conviction.
However, this defense becomes much harder to maintain if there’s a pattern of similar conduct, as in the Williamsburg case where seven arrests for similar behavior suggests intent rather than repeated accidents or misunderstandings.
Mistake or Misunderstanding
Sometimes charges arise from genuine misunderstandings. You may have reasonably believed the service was complimentary or included in something you’d already paid for. Perhaps there was confusion about who was responsible for payment in a group situation.
Dispute Over Service Quality
If you refused to pay because service was not provided as agreed, substantially deficient, or not provided at all, this is generally a civil dispute rather than criminal theft. However, this defense requires that the dispute be genuine and reasonable, not simply a pretext to avoid payment.
Procedural Defenses
There may be defenses based on how evidence was obtained or procedures followed, including illegal search and seizure issues, violations of your right to counsel, problems with witness identification, or failure to read Miranda rights before custodial interrogation.
Mistaken Identity
In some cases, particularly involving situations without clear surveillance footage, the prosecution may simply have charged the wrong person. However, in the Williamsburg case, News 12 reported that staff recognized the defendant after her pictures went viral on social media, making mistaken identity unlikely.
What Restaurants and Businesses Can Do
For business owners facing repeat theft of services, there are several options beyond relying on criminal prosecution.
Document Everything
Keep detailed records of incidents, including dates, times, amounts, surveillance footage, witness statements, and photos if available. This documentation helps both criminal prosecution and potential civil action.
Community Warnings
As Williamsburg restaurants have done, sharing information with other businesses (while being careful about defamation concerns) can help protect the broader community. Social media and business networks can be effective for spreading awareness.
Restraining Orders
News 12 reported that some Williamsburg restaurants are considering restraining orders against the defendant. A civil restraining order can legally bar someone from entering your establishment, and violating a restraining order is itself a criminal offense that may be bail-eligible.
Civil Lawsuits
While criminal prosecution is handled by the district attorney, businesses can independently pursue civil action to recover losses, plus potentially additional damages and attorney’s fees.
Prevention Measures
Some restaurants have implemented policies like requiring payment before food is served for solo diners, requiring credit card holds for high-value orders, or simply refusing service to known problem individuals.
When to Seek Legal Help
Whether you’re facing theft of services charges or are a business owner dealing with repeat offenders, legal guidance is essential.
For Those Facing Charges
If you’re charged with theft of services, consult with an experienced criminal defense attorney immediately. An attorney can review the evidence against you, identify potential defenses and weaknesses in the prosecution’s case, negotiate with prosecutors for reduced charges or favorable plea agreements, prepare your case for trial if necessary, and protect your rights throughout the process.
Even if you’ve been arrested multiple times and keep being released, as in the Williamsburg case, you still face serious long-term consequences from these convictions including a permanent criminal record, employment and housing barriers, and accumulating civil liability.
For Business Owners
If you’re a restaurant or business owner dealing with theft of services, a New York theft lawyer can advise you on pursuing civil remedies, obtaining restraining orders, proper documentation procedures, and working with prosecutors on criminal cases.
At the Law Offices of Robert Tsigler, PLLC, we understand both sides of theft of services cases. Whether you’re defending against charges or seeking to protect your business, our experienced team can provide the guidance you need.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why can’t someone be held on bail after seven arrests for the same thing?
As Attorney Tsigler explained to News 12, theft of services is typically a non-violent misdemeanor that doesn’t meet New York’s legal criteria for bail. Under current bail reform laws, prosecutors must show that charges involve “identifiable harm to person or property” and that the defendant is a flight risk. Because restaurant meals are legally classified as services rather than property, meeting that first requirement is very difficult, regardless of how many times someone has been arrested.
What would it take to make dining and dashing a felony?
According to Attorney Tsigler’s explanation to News 12, dining and dashing could become a felony if the person used a stolen credit card, or if they ordered an item over $1,000 (such as an expensive bottle of wine) and then refused to pay, which could be charged as grand larceny. Felony charges are generally bail-eligible, unlike typical misdemeanor theft of services charges.
Can restaurants refuse service to someone?
Generally yes, businesses have the right to refuse service to specific individuals, as long as the refusal isn’t based on protected characteristics like race, religion, or other civil rights protections. In the Williamsburg case, News 12 reported that restaurant staff have been warning each other and some are considering restraining orders, which would make it illegal for the person to enter those establishments.
Will paying restitution help if I’m charged?
Paying restitution is viewed favorably by prosecutors and judges and can result in more lenient outcomes. For first-time offenders who pay restitution promptly, charges might be reduced or dismissed. However, for repeat offenders with a pattern of behavior, restitution alone may not be sufficient, though it still helps.
Can someone be charged with both criminal and civil violations?
Yes, criminal prosecution and civil liability are completely separate. Even if criminal charges are dismissed or result in acquittal, victims can still pursue civil action to recover damages. Similarly, paying a civil settlement doesn’t automatically eliminate criminal liability.
Are theft of services charges deportable offenses for non-citizens?
Yes, theft of services is generally considered a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT), which can have serious immigration consequences for non-citizens, including lawful permanent residents. These convictions can lead to inadmissibility, deportability, or denial of naturalization. If you’re not a U.S. citizen, work with an attorney who understands both criminal defense and immigration law.
What if I genuinely couldn’t pay because my card was declined?
If you genuinely intended to pay but your card was unexpectedly declined and you couldn’t arrange alternative payment, that’s typically not criminal theft of services – the intent element is missing. However, you should immediately work to resolve the situation with the business and may still face civil liability for the debt. If criminal charges are filed anyway, an attorney can help demonstrate the lack of criminal intent.
Why do bail reform laws work this way?
New York’s bail reform was designed to address the problem of people being held in jail simply because they couldn’t afford bail, not because they posed a danger to the community. The reforms focus on dangerousness and flight risk rather than simply the fact that someone has been arrested. While this creates frustrating situations like the Williamsburg case, the alternative was a system where poor defendants remained in jail for minor offenses while wealthy defendants could buy their freedom regardless of the risk they posed.
Important Legal Resources
New York State Unified Court System – Official website providing information about court procedures, forms, and resources for defendants.
New York Bail Reform FAQ – Detailed explanation of New York’s bail reform laws and how they work.
New York Penal Law – Full text of New York’s criminal statutes, including theft of services provisions.
NY Criminal Sentencing Laws – Official statute on sentences of imprisonment for misdemeanors and violations.
NY Criminal Court Types – Official guide to types of criminal cases and their classifications.
NY Orders of Protection – Official information on obtaining orders of protection in New York.
NYC Supervised Release Program – Information about NYC’s supervised release program and how it works.
Legal Aid Society – Provides free legal services to low-income New Yorkers facing criminal charges.
New York State Bar Association – Offers lawyer referral services and legal resources.
Hire a Criminal Defense Lawyer
Representation matters in your criminal case. Our attorneys have decades of experience fighting for the interests of our clients. Our knowledgeable team can speak Spanish, Russian, Mandarin, Italian, Hungarian, German, and more to better serve you during a difficult time. We’re available 24/7, so contact us now for a confidential consultation.
