Unauthorized use of property is a criminal offense that covers taking control of someone else’s belongings without permission, even when you plan to give them back. That intent to return is what separates it from theft, and it is why the charge exists as its own category: taking something without asking causes real harm to the owner regardless of whether the item eventually comes back. Depending on what was taken and where, the offense can be a low-level misdemeanor or a felony carrying years in prison.
How It Differs From Theft
Theft (larceny) requires proof that the person intended to permanently deprive the owner of their property. Unauthorized use targets a lower bar: the person knowingly exercised control over property they had no right to use, but prosecutors do not have to prove they meant to keep it forever. The Model Penal Code reflects this split in Section 223.9, which treats operating someone else’s vehicle without consent as a standalone misdemeanor rather than folding it into theft.1American Law Institute. Model Penal Code Section 223.9 – Unauthorized Use of Automobiles and Other Vehicles
The practical effect shows up at sentencing. Vehicle theft is typically a felony carrying years of prison time, while unauthorized use of the same vehicle may be a misdemeanor with a one- or two-year maximum. When prosecutors cannot prove permanent-deprivation intent beyond a reasonable doubt (often because the property was recovered quickly or left nearby), the unauthorized use charge becomes the fallback that still gets a conviction.
Where the Charge Comes Up
Vehicles and Joyriding
The textbook case is joyriding: someone takes a car, boat, or motorcycle and either returns it or abandons it close by. Many states have specific joyriding statutes that do not require proof of intent to steal. The offense is complete the moment the person operates the vehicle knowing they lack the owner’s permission. Driving two blocks counts; returning it an hour later is not a defense to the charge itself, though it can soften the sentence.
These cases often involve people with some proximity to the vehicle: a family member’s car, a neighbor’s motorcycle with the keys visible, a rental kept past the due date. Prior consent does not carry forward. Borrowing a roommate’s car once with permission and then taking it again without asking crosses the line.
Workplace Equipment
Employees can face unauthorized use charges for running company-owned equipment on personal projects. Taking a company truck to move furniture on a weekend, using an office printing system for personal documents after hours, or borrowing specialized tools without asking all qualify. General access to the workplace is not blanket permission to operate every piece of equipment inside it.
Computer Systems
Unauthorized access to computer systems has its own federal statute: the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), at 18 U.S.C. § 1030. The CFAA covers anyone who accesses a protected computer “without authorization” or who “exceeds authorized access” by reaching information in areas of the system they were not entitled to see.2Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 1030 – Fraud and Related Activity in Connection With Computers
The Supreme Court narrowed what “exceeds authorized access” means in Van Buren v. United States (2021), holding that the phrase covers reaching off-limits areas of a system, not simply using permitted access for an improper purpose. A police officer who ran a license plate search for personal reasons, using a database he was otherwise allowed to use, did not violate the CFAA.3Supreme Court of the United States. Van Buren v. United States, 593 U.S. 374 (2021) The Department of Justice follows the same line, declining to bring “exceeds authorized access” cases based solely on workplace policy or terms-of-service violations.4U.S. Department of Justice. Justice Manual – Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
Criminal Penalties
Misdemeanor Level
Most unauthorized use charges involving lower-value property are misdemeanors. The maximum in most states is up to one year of incarceration, though many cases end in probation, community service, or fines. Misdemeanor fines typically run from a few hundred to a few thousand dollars depending on the jurisdiction. The Model Penal Code places unauthorized use of a vehicle in this misdemeanor tier.1American Law Institute. Model Penal Code Section 223.9 – Unauthorized Use of Automobiles and Other Vehicles
Felony Level
Charges escalate to felony when the property is valuable or falls into a special category. Motor vehicles are often felony-level property regardless of dollar value. For other property types, the felony threshold varies widely. As of 2026, the value that triggers a felony ranges from $200 in the strictest states to $2,500 in the most lenient, with $1,000 the most common figure across roughly 20 states. Felony convictions can carry prison sentences of one to five years or more, with fines that commonly exceed $5,000.
A felony record follows the conviction long after any sentence ends. Background checks flag it for employers, landlords, and licensing boards. Work involving driving, expensive equipment, or sensitive systems becomes harder to get. Professional licenses in healthcare, finance, and transportation can be reviewed, suspended, or denied after a felony property conviction.
Federal Computer Offenses
The CFAA has its own penalty ladder. A first offense for accessing a computer without authorization and obtaining information is punishable by up to one year in prison. If the access was for commercial gain, furthered another crime, or involved information worth more than $5,000, the maximum rises to five years. Repeat offenders face up to ten years. Violations involving government computers or national security information carry maximums of ten to twenty years.2Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 1030 – Fraud and Related Activity in Connection With Computers
Defenses That Work
The strongest defense is showing you reasonably believed the owner would have given permission. The Model Penal Code treats this as an affirmative defense: if the person can show a genuine and reasonable belief that the owner would have consented had they been asked, the charge fails.1American Law Institute. Model Penal Code Section 223.9 – Unauthorized Use of Automobiles and Other Vehicles Many state statutes follow the same approach. The belief has to be objectively reasonable. “I figured they wouldn’t mind” is not enough; the defense works when there’s a pattern of prior lending, a close relationship, or some concrete basis for the assumption.
Other defenses that come up often:
- Actual consent, where the owner did give permission and the fight is over whether it was revoked or exceeded. Texts, witnesses, or a prior course of dealing can establish this.
- Claim of right, where the person believed in good faith they had a legal right to the property, such as a co-owner exercising their interest or someone retrieving property they believe was wrongly taken from them.
- Mistaken identity, which comes up in vehicle cases where multiple people had access to the keys.
- Lack of knowledge, where the person did not know they lacked authorization — for example, an employee told by a coworker that they could use a piece of equipment, when the coworker had no authority to grant permission.
In CFAA cases, the DOJ will not pursue charges against good-faith security researchers who accessed a system solely to find and report vulnerabilities, took steps to avoid harm, and used what they found to improve security rather than exploit it.4U.S. Department of Justice. Justice Manual – Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
Civil Liability on Top of the Criminal Case
A criminal charge is not the end of the exposure. The civil tort of conversion lets an owner sue anyone who exercised unauthorized control over their property, whether or not criminal charges were filed. The remedy is either return of the property or payment of its fair market value. If the property came back damaged, the owner can recover repair costs, diminished value, and expenses during the period it was gone. Courts also calculate what the owner lost by not having the property available, often measured against what a rental would have cost over the same period, plus fuel, consumables, and wear.
Criminal courts can also order restitution directly as part of the sentence. Federal law requires restitution covering the value of damaged, lost, or destroyed property, measured at either the date of the offense or the date of sentencing, whichever is greater, along with the victim’s out-of-pocket costs for participating in the prosecution.5Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 3663A – Mandatory Restitution to Victims of Certain Crimes Most states have similar restitution laws that let a criminal court order repayment without the victim filing a separate civil suit.
Insurance Problems When a Vehicle Is Involved
Auto insurance generally follows the car rather than the driver, but non-permissive use breaks that rule. When a vehicle is taken without the owner’s knowledge or consent, the owner’s insurer may deny the claim entirely on the grounds that the owner bears no responsibility. The unauthorized driver’s own auto insurance, if they have any, becomes the primary source of coverage. If they are uninsured, the owner may have to rely on their own uninsured motorist coverage or chase a civil judgment directly against the person who took the vehicle. Victims of joyriding often face real out-of-pocket costs before anything is recovered.
Homeowners’ insurance will not fill the gap for the person who took the property. These policies exclude intentional acts, so a deliberate unauthorized use leaves the person personally exposed to the full civil judgment.