theft stemming from the misappropriation of these funds. He appealed, alleging, among other things, that he was not guilty of any crime, because he had not intended to per- manently deprive any of the clients of their trust funds. Furthermore, because none of the victims whose trust funds were used to cover operating expenses was denied serv- ices, no injury was done. Will the court agree with Ludvigson? Explain. [State v. Ludvigson, 482 N.W.2d 419 (la. 1992)]