Legal Question in Criminal Law in California

if you can prove permission to borrow the vehicle at that time, then sure, that shouldn't be a big problem ... if permission was granted the question (of the other side) would be "why did the owner report it stolen?" Either way, talking to some local criminal defense attorneys about the facts is a good idea. Good luck!

If you had permission to have the car then you did not commit the offense. But as to how strong your case is, you have not given us enough information. You need to have a one on one conversation with a criminal defense attorney or two and answer all of their questions.

Just being arrested doesn't mean they will file charges against you and it certainly doesn't mean they have enough to convict you. For Vehicle theft under 10851 of the Vehicle Code, they have to prove you took the car without permission.

You need a good criminal defense attorney. I'd strongly suggest you find someone who focuses on criminal law and who routinely practices in the court where this case will be heard. You have decent defenses, but they need to be presented through your attorney.

You seem to be withholding facts. Without the whole story, it's hard to assess your case.

If the owner gave you permission to use the car for a while but you kept it longer, then your case is weak -- especially if it seems you intended to keep the car permanently. If the owner rescinded your permission and demanded the car back but you refused to return it, your case is weak. If he lives in Maine and gave you permission only to use the car locally but you took it to California, your case is weak. If he gave you permission because you were holding his family hostage at the time, your case is weak. I could go on.