What must the court do when a judgment is entered for theft of gasoline and it is a subsequent offense?

• A. Enter a special affirmative finding
• B. Deny the conviction
• C. Record no finding
• D. Note only in the docket

Answer: (A)

The main idea is that when a theft of gasoline is treated as a subsequent offense, the court must explicitly record that status in the judgment. This is done by entering a special affirmative finding. Such a finding signals to the sentencing court and the record that the offender has prior theft convictions, which, under the applicable statutes, triggers enhanced penalties. The finding is essential to authorize the higher punishment and to ensure the record clearly shows the repeat nature of the offense for future reference.

Denying the conviction would be inconsistent with the facts and the case history. Recording no finding would leave the judgment without the necessary indication that this is a repeat offense, undermining any statutory enhancement. Merely noting something in the docket doesn’t place the necessary, enforceable indication into the judgment itself. The special affirmative finding is the precise step required to reflect the second-or-subsequent offense and apply the appropriate sentence.