A man who was accused of planting tools inside a mailbox in the Bronx to fish out items will face lesser criminal charges than those originally brought by prosecutors, after the New York Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that he couldn't have known the value of what he might catch.

Prosecutors from the Bronx District Attorney's Office indicted Omar Deleon on charges of attempting to steal more than $3,000, but lacked the evidence to do so, the state's highest court said.

"Viewed in the light most favorable to the People, the evidence presented to the grand jury was insufficient to demonstrate that defendant came dangerously close to taking property valued in excess of $3,000 or $1,000," the court wrote in a memorandum decision.

Andrea Yacka-Bible, supervising attorney with the Criminal Appeals Bureau at The Legal Aid Society, represented Deleon during arguments before the Court of Appeals in early September. She said the decision was a win for low-income defendants like Deleon.

"This is a classic example of prosecutors overcharging our clients with crimes that expose them to harsh state prison sentences," Yacka-Bible said. "We laud the Court of Appeals for righting this injustice. It's simple: no New Yorker should ever be charged with a crime that they did not commit."

The amount Deleon was alleged to have attempted to steal from the mailbox was key to the case, as was demonstrated during arguments last month.

Deleon was indicted three years ago on charges of attempted grand larceny in the third and fourth degrees after allegedly engaging in a so-called "mailbox fishing" theft. According to prosecutors, Deleon fashioned a device to fish items from a mailbox in the Bronx.

The device was made using a plastic water bottle and a piece of string. The water bottle was coated with a sticky substance to attract items, and the string was used to pull it out of the mailbox.

After previous incidences of "mailbox fishing" were reported in the area, a joint task force led by the U.S. Postal Service and the New York City Police Department set up a sting operation.

They placed two money orders totaling $3,050 in a mailbox that had previously been reported as the site of "mailbox fishing" and waited. That amount is crucial; to be charged with attempted grand larceny in the third degree an individual has to have attempted to steal more than $3,000 of someone's property.

Members of law enforcement saw Deleon visit the mailbox, where they said he started to retrieve the plastic bottle. He was arrested before he was able to remove the device from the mailbox.

After the arrest, members of law enforcement removed the bottle from the mailbox and found four items attached to it. They didn't record the value of those items, or whether they were even the money orders planted in the box.

Deleon later admitted to a postal inspector that he was promised $100 from someone else for every mailbox he fished, according to the record.

He was indicted, in part, on attempted grand larceny in the third degree by prosecutors, who argued that the charge was appropriate because the value of the money orders inside the mailbox exceeded $3,000. That's a class E felony, which carries a maximum sentence of four years in state prison, with the possibility of no jail time at all.

The Court of Appeals, on Tuesday, said Deleon should, instead, only face a charge of attempted petit larceny, a class B misdemeanor that would carry a maximum sentence of three months in jail—a much lighter penalty than the previous charge.

That's because, the court said, prosecutors had no evidence to show that Deleon, intentionally or unintentionally, attempted to steal more than $3,000.

In its decision, the high court listed a series of faults in the prosecution's case against Deleon.

There was no evidence that the items attached the the device had any monetary value, the court said, and no evidence of how many items were in the mailbox to begin with. There also wasn't evidence that Deleon could have even fished out the two money orders, the court said.

Prosecutors also didn't present evidence on whether the fishing device could immediately be reused to commit another theft, or that he intended to make another attempt after the first.

The amount that Deleon was expected to be paid for each "mailbox fishing" attempt also didn't persuade the court that he had an incentive to steal enough to justify a charge of attempted third-degree larceny, the decision said.

"Furthermore, the fact that defendant stated he would be paid $100 for each mailbox fished does not establish that he came dangerously close to stealing property valued at more than $3,000 or $1,000," the court wrote.

The ruling was a modification of a decision handed down by the Appellate Division, First Department last year that reinstated the original charges against Deleon after a trial court judge had previously agreed to have them reduced.

The Bronx District Attorney's Office declined to comment on the decision Tuesday.

READ MORE: