It will be three years of probation and 480 hours of community service for Winona Ryder, who was convicted last month of grand theft after stealing nearly $6,000 worth of high-priced merchandise from the Beverly Hills Saks Fifth Avenue store a year ago.
She also has been ordered to participate in a court-approved drug and psychological counseling program and pay a fine of $2,700, a restitution fine of $1,000 to the court, and restitution of $6,355 to Saks, the Associated Press reports.
She is due back in court April 7 for a status hearing.
Beverly Hills Superior Court Judge Elden S. Fox also imposed a technical term of one day in jail but credited Ryder for the day she was booked.
In delivering Ryder’s sentence Friday morning, the jurist said: “It is not my intention to make an example of you,” but, he said, she had disappointed many people and would have to “confront certain issues” that led to her behavior.
“You have refused to accept personal responsibility,” the jurist told the actress.
“If you steal again, you will go to jail. Understand that?” he told her.
“Yes, Your Honor, I do,” she replied — the few words she said in court.
On Nov. 6, the jury also found the “Girl, Interrupted” actress, 31, guilty of vandalism but acquitted her of burglary. The most damning bit of evidence against the actress, jurors said after the trial, was a Saks security video that showed her leaving the store bundled in expensive clothing that she hadn’t paid for.
But more damning evidence came to light after the sentence was handed down.
A probation report released by the court Friday cited an investigation that had found she received 37 medications from 20 doctors between January 1996 and December 1998.
Ryder had numerous prescription drugs in her possession as well as a syringe in her purse at the time of her Dec. 12, 2001, arrest. A drug charge had been filed but was eventually dropped after a doctor said he had prescribed the medication.
Ryder’s lawyer, Mark Geragos, had argued in vain to have the report sealed, saying he was trying to “preserve some shred of privacy” for Ryder. But the prosecutor in the case, Ann Rundle, argued back that all felons give up their right to privacy.
The judge, agreeing to remove some irrelevant facts from the report, concurred with Rundle.