Robbery Theft in Frankfurt (§ 252 StGB) – Criminal Defence & Nationwide Representation

Allegations of robbery theft often arise out of everyday situations — a shop incident, pursuit after leaving the checkout, or a spontaneous grab. Legally, it is a theft where coercive means (violence or threats of present danger to life or limb) are used after the taking to secure the loot. Anyone “caught in the act” who then resorts to violence or threats can be punished like a robber under § 252 StGB — with significant sentencing ranges and intrusive measures already during the investigation. Buchert Jacob Peter in Frankfurt supports suspects, witnesses and companies swiftly and discreetly — nationwide.

Problem: What does robbery theft cover — and where are the risks?

Robbery theft is an independent, robbery-like offence. Unlike robbery or robbery extortion, the coercion is not used to enable the taking, but to secure the booty. A typical pattern: a person leaves the checkout with goods, is pursued, and then uses force to keep the item. Because § 252 StGB punishes “as a robber”, the minimum sentence is one year. Searches, seizures or even arrest warrants are possible early on. Early, structured defence is critical. For the path of proceedings, see our overview of the course of criminal proceedings and German criminal procedure.

Recurring contest points include: (1) was the underlying theft completed? (2) was the offender caught in the act — with tight time and place proximity? (3) were violence/threats used to remain in possession? (4) did the offender act with intent to retain possession? Small evidential inaccuracies can decisively change classification and sentence.

Solution: Consistent defence — fast, forward-looking, client-centred

We create clarity quickly and protect your rights. Access to the file is key; until then, use your right to remain silent — do not attend police interviews unaccompanied (summons for interrogation). We test whether initial suspicion is sound and if sufficient suspicion is actually met; depending on the record, we seek discontinuance or tactically prepare trial. Updates and background appear under News/Current Topics on our site.

Approach: How we work in § 252 cases

• Immediate shielding, communication with police/prosecution, clear next steps.
• Rapid file access and evidence review (CCTV, witnesses, traces), precise timeline reconstruction.
• Legal analysis: completion of theft, “caught in the act”, intent to retain possession, use of violence/threats.
• Securing exculpatory material (distance, perception, alternative narratives, lack of “present danger”).
• Targeted motions; preparation for evidence-taking and remedies (appeal) through to finality.

Legal classification: Core elements of robbery theft

1) Predicate offence: completed theft as a starting point

As a rule, § 252 StGB requires a completed theft. Only after that may coercion be used to keep the loot. Without completion, § 252 generally does not apply. In complex settings (co-perpetration, errors about completion, “inept” attempts despite factual control), careful analysis is decisive. We test whether theft is proven at all — or whether only other offences or a misunderstanding are in play.

2) “Caught in the act”: time-and-place proximity

“Fresh” means a tight temporal/spatial link with the theft. This is regularly met at the scene, nearby, or during immediate pursuit. Example: leaving a store and knocking down a pursuer to keep the goods. Incidents just before discovery can also qualify if the offender anticipates detection by moments. Video, routes, lines of sight and perception are defence-relevant details.

3) Coercive means: violence or threat of present danger

Required is qualified violence against a person or a threat of present danger to life or limb. Not every scuffle meets the threshold. We examine whether there was real physical compulsion or a serious, near-term danger. If not, § 252 falls away — other, milder constellations may remain.

4) Intent to retain possession: safeguarding the loot

Subjectively, the act must aim to retain possession of the loot. Pure flight can suffice where it simultaneously serves retention; flight with empty hands or without link to the loot argues against it. Success is irrelevant — the aim is decisive. We develop alternatives from facts and perception/communication analysis.

Distinctions: Robbery theft, robbery & robbery extortion

The doctrinal line follows timing and purpose of coercion: for robbery, coercion enables the taking; for robbery theft, coercion secures the loot after taking; for robbery extortion, a disposition of property is forced — the outward picture is “giving” rather than “taking”. This affects sentencing, proof and tactics. We argue clearly, avoid unwarranted escalation to § 250 StGB, and work — where possible — towards milder alternatives. See also access to files and indictment.

Corporate context & compliance: tills, pursuits, security

Businesses face organisational questions: may staff pursue? What training ensures lawful response? We combine defence with corporate-crime advice, refine house rules, reporting chains and evidence capture (CCTV, till journals) to reduce legal and reputational risk. Where HR/shifts are affected, we factor in interfaces with employment criminal law.

Your advantages with Buchert Jacob Peter

• Procedural economy: Prioritising steps that move outcomes — secure the record, test “freshness”, challenge the threat threshold, document exculpatory alternatives.
• Borderline expertise: Close-distance incidents, limited perception, ambiguous threats — handled with evidence-based argumentation.
• Broad scope: From classic defence to white-collar and insolvency interfaces when payment flows or corporate routines are involved.

FAQ – Robbery Theft (§ 252 StGB)

• What does “caught in the act” mean?
  Detection at the scene, nearby or during immediate pursuit with tight temporal/spatial link. Video, witnesses and routes are central.
• Does any threat suffice?
  No. It must be a threat of present danger to life or limb or qualifying violence. A harsh statement without present danger is insufficient for § 252.
• What if I only wanted to flee?
  If flight also serves to keep the loot, intent to retain possession may exist; flight without link to the item argues against it.
• What penalties are possible?
  “Like a robber” → minimum one year. Depending on facts, robbery qualifiers can come into play. Active, precise defence can improve outcomes — even discontinuance.
• How should I react to summonses or searches?
  Make no statements without defence. Use your right to remain silent; we take over communication and review search/seizure orders.
• Can the case be discontinued?
  Yes, depending on the file — e.g. no “fresh act”, threat threshold not met, unclear intent to retain possession. We substantiate discontinuance and work alternatives.

Call-to-Action: Get reliable advice now

Need rapid support regarding an allegation under § 252 StGB? We advise confidentially, structured and solution-focused — in Frankfurt and nationwide. Call +49 69 710 33 330 or email kanzlei@dr-buchert.de. You can also use our contact page.

Contact us – Your Specialist Criminal Lawyers in Frankfurt am Main and Nationwide

• Attorney Frank M. Peter, Specialist Lawyer for Criminal Law
• Attorney Dr. Caroline Jacob, Specialist Lawyer for Criminal Law
• Of Counsel: Prof. Dr. Frank Peter Schuster
• Cooperation Partner: Tax Advisor and former Tax Investigator Frank Wehrheim

Our law firm Buchert Jacob Peter has been based in Frankfurt am Main for over 25 years with experienced criminal defence lawyers. We represent clients nationwide.

Contact: Phone +49 69 710 33 330 · Email kanzlei@dr-buchert.de

More on this:

Criminal Defence ·
Legal Dictionary ·
White-Collar Crime ·
Attorneys

• Teilen