That on or about February 14, 2026, at approximately 10:42 A.M., an officer with Fridley Police Department responded to Menards, located at [ADDRESS REDACTED] NE, Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota in reference to a robbery. Upon arrival, law enforcement made contact with Victim. Victim [NAME REDACTED]. Victim [NAME REDACTED] at approximately 3:00 A.M. On February 14, 2026, Victim and a male returned to Victim’s address, located on the 1200 block of Cheri Lane NE, Fridley, Anoka County, Minnesota, after a night of drinking.
When Victim woke up several hours later, the male was missing. Additionally, Victim’s television, purses, and banking cards were missing. Victim could not identify the male. Prior to contact with law enforcement, Victim had observed unauthorized transactions charged to the stolen Netspend debit card. Victim returned to the residence with law enforcement. Law enforcement was informed by Victim that a Hisense 55-inch television was stolen, along with four purses. The total estimated value of the stolen items was $520. Victim further provided law enforcement with a list of unauthorized transactions that had occurred on February 14. Between 4:59 A.M. And 5:02 A.M., Victim’s Netspend card (ending in #2085) was used seven different times at MotoMart, [ADDRESS REDACTED], Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Between 7:30 A.M. And 7:39 A.M. On February 14, Victim’s Netspend card was used three times at Target, located at [ADDRESS REDACTED], Minneapolis, Minnesota. The total value of the transactions was $734.03. Law enforcement made contact with Victim’s neighbor, who had a doorbell camera. Law enforcement was provided an image of a black male entering Victim’s apartment at 3:02 A.M. Victim further discovered an unfamiliar phone number in their cell phone. Detectives conducted a search of the phone number and discovered it was registered to a black male named TERRY DESEAN PENDLETON [DOB REDACTED], hereinafter Defendant.
Detective further received surveillance footage from the aforementioned Target and MotoMart. In reviewing the surveillance footage, detectives determined the male using Victim’s banking card was the same male who was observed entering Victim’s residence at 3:00 A.M. On February 14. When detectives compared the images of the suspect in the retailer surveillance to Defendant’s DVS photo, there was a match. It should be noted law enforcement attempted to make contact with Defendant but never received a phone call back.
Victim did not give consent to Defendant to take Victim’s property. Further, Victim did not consent to Defendant using Victim’s banking card to make any purchases. The State respectfully requests a complaint summons in this matter.
