A person can be charged criminally for possessing property that was stolen or otherwise obtained through crime, even if they had no involvement in the original offence. This charge, formally called possession of property obtained by crime, catches a distinct category of conduct separate from theft itself. This guide explains how this offence is defined under section 354 of the Criminal Code, the central role that knowledge plays in these cases, potential penalties, and what generally happens after this kind of charge in Ontario. It is general legal information, not legal advice about a specific case.
What Is Possession of Property Obtained by Crime?
Section 354 of the Criminal Code makes it an offence to have in one's possession any property or thing, or any proceeds of property or a thing, knowing that all or part of it was obtained directly or indirectly through the commission of an offence in Canada, or through an act or omission anywhere that would have been an offence if it had occurred in Canada. This offence is commonly, though informally, referred to as "possession of stolen property," even though it technically covers property obtained through any crime, not just theft, including fraud or robbery.
The Central Role of Knowledge
The single most important element the Crown must prove in these cases is knowledge: that the person knew, at the time they had the property in their possession, that it was obtained through crime. Simply having property that later turns out to have been stolen is not, by itself, a criminal offence. Courts can infer knowledge from circumstances, such as an unusually low purchase price, an unwillingness or inability to explain how the property was obtained, evidence of a serial number that had been altered or removed, or a pattern of similar conduct. Whether the available circumstantial evidence supports an inference of actual knowledge, as opposed to mere suspicion or willful blindness that falls short of the legal standard, is often the central issue at trial.
Classification and Penalties
As with theft, the classification and maximum penalty for this offence depend on the value of the property involved, using the same $5,000 threshold.
Possession of Property Obtained by Crime (Section 354) at a Glance
- Classification – $5,000 or under
- Hybrid offence (Crown elects summary conviction or indictment)
- Maximum penalty – $5,000 or under
- Up to 2 years on indictment; a lesser maximum on summary conviction
- Classification – over $5,000, or a testamentary instrument
- Indictable offence, maximum 10 years on indictment; up to 2 years less a day on summary conviction
- Mandatory minimum sentence
- None
These figures reflect the Criminal Code as of this page's last update. Actual sentences depend on the value of the property, whether the person profited from reselling it, and their record. A criminal lawyer can confirm the current state of the law for a specific case.
Common Scenarios
This charge frequently arises in situations such as purchasing an item, often electronics, jewelry, or a vehicle or its parts, from an informal or online marketplace at a price that later turns out to reflect its stolen origin, receiving property from a friend or acquaintance without asking questions about where it came from, or operating a business, such as a pawn shop or resale operation, that regularly deals in second-hand goods without adequate verification of their source. The circumstances surrounding how, and from whom, the property was acquired are usually central to how these cases are investigated and prosecuted.
How This Relates to Other Charges
This charge is distinct from, though often connected to, other property offences. Someone who personally steals property is generally charged with theft rather than possession of stolen property, while someone who later acquires that same property, knowing its origin, can be separately charged with possession. Where property was obtained through a fraud rather than a theft, a person knowingly possessing the proceeds can still be charged under section 354. Trafficking in property obtained by crime, meaning selling, transferring, or otherwise dealing with it, is a related but separate offence under section 355.2 of the Criminal Code, generally reserved for those more actively involved in moving stolen property rather than simply possessing it.
Anyone buying used goods, particularly higher-value items like electronics or vehicles, from an individual seller can reduce their legal risk by asking for proof of ownership or purchase and being cautious of prices that seem unusually low for the item in question.
This charge sometimes arises when police recover stolen property, such as a bicycle or a stolen vehicle, in the possession of someone entirely unconnected to the original theft. In these cases, the person's explanation for how and when they acquired the item is often the single most important piece of evidence in the case.
Possible Defences
Because knowledge is the central element of this offence, defending against this charge often focuses on whether the Crown can prove the person actually knew, rather than merely suspected or should have suspected, that the property was obtained through crime. Evidence of a plausible, honest explanation for how the property was acquired can be significant. Other issues that can arise include whether the person was in genuine possession or control of the property at all, and whether any statements made to police were properly obtained. A criminal lawyer should review the specific circumstances of how the property came into the person's possession before advising on possible defences.
What Happens After This Charge
Most people charged with this offence, particularly for lower-value property and with no record, are not held for a bail hearing. The case then proceeds through the standard court process, including a first appearance and disclosure, which in these cases often includes evidence about how the property was traced back to its original owner and how police connected it to the accused. A conviction results in a criminal record; see our criminal records overview for more, and our sentencing overview for general sentencing principles.
Because this offence can apply to anyone in the chain of possession after an original theft or fraud, it is sometimes charged against several people connected to the same underlying property, each assessed individually based on what they personally knew at the time they had the property. A person who quickly hands property over to police upon learning of its origin is generally in a very different position than someone who continued to use or resell it after learning the truth.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I be charged if I didn't know the property was stolen?
No. Knowledge that the property was obtained through crime is a required element of this offence. Simply having property that later turns out to be stolen, without that knowledge, is not a criminal offence under section 354.
What if I only suspected the item might be stolen?
The legal standard requires proof of actual knowledge, though courts can find that a person's willful blindness to circumstances that obviously pointed to a criminal origin amounts to knowledge in the eyes of the law. This is a fact-specific and sometimes contested legal issue.
Is this the same charge as theft?
No. Theft involves taking the property in the first place, while possession of property obtained by crime applies to someone who later has the property, knowing it was obtained through a crime, even if they were not involved in the original offence.
Does this charge apply to property obtained through fraud, not just theft?
Yes. Section 354 applies broadly to property obtained through the commission of any offence, not only theft, including fraud, robbery, and other crimes.
Can a business be charged for unknowingly buying stolen goods?
A business that genuinely did not know, and had no reason to believe, that goods were stolen would not meet the knowledge requirement for this offence. However, businesses that regularly deal in second-hand goods may face closer scrutiny regarding what they knew or should have verified.