Lost property with an identifiable owner. Is there a legal obligation to return it?

Do not need answer fast.

But…if a person finds something that has clearly been lost - a wallet, a cellphone, a package - and they can easily identify the owner (the package has an addressee, the wallet has ID), are they obligated to return it? If they don’t, can they be prosecuted?

If it’s slightly harder to find - if the cellphone has the owner’s name & address in the contacts under “Me”, for example - does that change things? The Finder could claim that they didn’t see it a lot easier.

Of course, keeping it in any of those situations would be a dick move. But would it be theft?

This thread inspired by me losing my smartphone a couple weeks back and the person who found it taking their own sweet time in returning it.

Who’s to say that the item wasn’t stolen and abandoned by the thief, or dropped part of his booty while running from the cops. In that case, you would be in possession of stolen property.

Very interesting! Looks like the local PD was just being lazy, then. (We knew it had been found, and what house it was in, but the fellow took a really long time to return it, the cops said they couldn’t do anything.)

This is where, as we say here on the Dope, your mileage may vary. Is it against the law? Yes - almost everywhere. Is it the kind if crime police are actively going to pursue? Not so much so. A lot of places will tell you to file in small claims court. Don’t get me wrong - I’m sure there are places where the local PD would go knocking doors; but those are going to be the minority.

I found a cell phone as I walked along side of the road. I took it the same day to the local store for that provider whose name was on the phone., they called the owner there of. He called the police and I was picked up for theft. They didn’t file any charges, but he tried to. I decided if that happened to me again I’d sell it to an exporter and get it out of the USA.

Why didn’t you go to the prosecution attorney and file charges if you knew where it was.

Because he did return it a couple days later, though he tried to extort a $100 “reward” out of me for it. I wound up giving him $25. I was just happy to have it back.

Stealing for ransom is commonplace with pets, over here at least where the thief doesn’t risk a bullet from an irate owner.

I searched for a cite and found this amusing story :stolen sandwich ransom

This reminds me of New York City Police Department’s Operation Lucky Bag.

The police left random valuable objects around the city while watching from a distance. If someone picked an object up and walked past a police officer stationed nearby, plain clothes police would arrest them. If the person turned the object in to the police officer, the officer would frisk them, demand ID, and check them for warrants.

This sounds strange. First how did anyone involved know your name?

Where did he find it, how far do you live from him, and how did he return it?

If I found something lost near my house I’d contact the owner immediately and I certainly wouldn’t try to extort any sort of reward out of them. But I wouldn’t go way out of my way to return it either. I’d be willing to meet the owner at my house, or where I work, or someplace convenient for me. But if they want me to drop it off at their house which is way out of my way and wouldn’t travel to me, I might just put the thing right back where I found it. Or more likely drop it off at a police station or something.

Such charmers, the NYPD.

Local folk wisdom once was, may still be, that legally anything on the floor of a casino in Nevada should be left there.

Could we have a cite for that last sentence? Your link doesn’t say anything about that.

NYPD says Operation Lucky Bag stings have snared nearly 300 people

Is there any legal rationale as to why “walking past an officer with found property” is an arrestable offense?

Or does it merely rise to the standard of reasonable suspicion?

If it were to go to trial - what sort of charges could be expected?

As I recall the news stories, they would for example leave a wallet with money in it. If the guy who found it got on the train instead of taking it to the ticket booth, they assumed he was trying to get away with it and would charge him. This of course ignores good Samaritans who maybe lived near a police station, or people in a hurry to catch their train who intended to turn it in when they reached the next stop, etc.

The allegation is the person was trying to make a getaway.

The logic escapes me. Was there an epidemic of dropped wallets going missing, obviously pointing to thefts? Maybe they couldn’t make their jaywalking ticket quota.

Definitely charming. Maybe they left a bag of “loosies” out too.

Alley Dweller, that link doesn’t say what you think it says. It says that the guy they frisked had not removed the money from the wallet, but he didn’t turn it over to the police officer until after the police stopped him. Nowhere does it say anything about people who voluntarily turned over the wallet being frisked.

Sorry if this sounds snarky…

But yeah, I kinda worked out what rationale they were using to make the arrest —

Was more wondering if such rationale would have stood up to examination in court for exactly the reasons you state, or if the whole thing was legally flawed.

IOW - how does walking past a cop with a found wallet prove any sort of intent?