The Colorado Supreme Court dismissed an unusual appeal out of municipal court last week, after the city of Rifle backed down and changed its local penalties for theft under the threat of having its ordinance struck down for a constitutional violation.

After the justices told the city to explain why it should be allowed to punish people with 18 times more jail time than state law provides for the same offense, council members amended Rifle’s ordinance earlier this month to sync up with the state’s penalties.

“Given the limited fiscal resources of the City, which has a population of only 10,000 people, and in light of its current practice regarding enforcement of its code, Rifle does not believe that litigating disparate municipal penalties in is the best interests of its citizens,” wrote Nick Poppe, an attorney for the city, to the Supreme Court.

Last month, the justices signaled their interest in deciding a rare case out of municipal court implicating the equal protection guarantee in Colorado’s constitution. The city’s revision of its ordinance, effective immediately, rendered the appeal moot.

According to a police report, Jeremiah and Michelle Mobley allegedly walked out of a boutique clothing store with two $15 shirts, neither of which they paid for. When officers arrived at the home, Michelle Mobley gave back the $30 in merchandise and received a summons for theft.

The Mobleys’ charge fell under the Rifle Municipal Code. Although the definition of theft was almost identical to the one in state law, there was a critical difference: If they were convicted in state court, they would face a maximum of 10 days in jail. Under the municipal code, they could spend up to six months behind bars.

The Mobleys sought to declare Rifle’s code unconstitutional, as it imposed a more severe sentence for identical conduct. In response, the city argued its “unique” location along Interstate 70 gave it grounds to deter theft more harshly than the state has chosen to.

“Rifle specifically attracts travelers and pulls consumers from a wide rural area. This mixed market lends itself to a higher rate of instances of theft than comparable cities,” claimed prosecuting attorney Timothy L. Graves. With a 10-day maximum jail sentence, “there would be no sufficient deterrence of theft within this unique municipality.”

In June, Municipal Court Judge Victor M. Zerbi concluded Rifle was able to enact a harsher punishment for theft. He acknowledged the lack of recent court decisions on the subject, and instead linked to CNN and Fox News articles about retail theft in his order.

“This Court submits the differences between the state and Rifle theft sentencing schemes is not unreasonable,” he wrote.

The Mobleys appealed to the Supreme Court, urging it to declare the theft provision of Rifle’s code unconstitutional. The ACLU of Colorado and the Office of the Alternate Defense Counsel wrote in support of the Mobleys’ cause.

“Even if Rifle has the authority to punish shoplifting,” they argued, “it cannot legislate away Coloradans’ constitutional right to equal protection under the law.”

During a council meeting on Dec. 6, Rifle City Attorney James S. Neu told council members most municipalities have different criminal penalties than the state, but “somehow Rifle got this petition.” He added that Rifle has never punished defendants as severely as its own code allowed, but he did not believe the city had the resources to litigate the Mobleys’ appeal.

Council members begrudgingly agreed to change the law.

“We wanna kowtow to the Supreme Court of the state of Colorado and give our right to protect our citizens up?” countered Councilor Brian Condie, who ultimately voted against the change. “This is a pernicious path to a very bad policy that will bring harm to our community within five years. We will have the looting and the car break-ins as you see in larger cities.”

He added his belief that Rifle was “picked on purpose” because of its size, leading Neu to clarify that the Supreme Court case actually was the product of the Mobleys’ right to appeal.

The city told the Supreme Court it has since dropped the local prosecution of the Mobleys.

The case is Rifle v. Mobley et al.