Have you been accused of a crime?
Call for a free consultation 24/7 toll-free:
(888) 744-7730

California Penal Code § 451 – Arson Laws

California Penal Code § [Section] 451 – Arson

California Penal Code [CPC] §451Arson – Penal Code Section 451 makes it illegal to burn property willfully and maliciously or to aid someone else in burning property. Even the slightest singeing is sufficient for arson. However, burning your own property, or getting someone else to burn your property, isn't an act of arson unless you intend on defrauding someone, or you hurt someone, or you damage someone else's property.

If you're convicted of an act of arson, the penalty may be a term of up to nine years in a state prison, a fine of up to $10,000, or both a fine and imprisonment. The crime is also punishable under California's “Three Strikes” system. If you accrue three “strikes” on your record, you'll serve a minimum of twenty- five years in a state prison.

What Does California Penal Code §451 [Arson] Prohibit?

In sum, to be guilty of Arson under CPC §451, you must:

  • Burn property; OR,
  • Get someone else to burn property; AND,
  • Act willfully; AND,
  • Act maliciously.

Defining “Arson” Under California Penal Code §451

To convict you under CPC §451, the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

  • YOU BURNED a structure, forest land, Or property: You burned[1] a structure,[2] forest land,[3] or property[4]; OR,
  • AIDED, COUNSELED, OR PROCURED:You aided, counseled, or procured another person to burn a structure, forest land, or property; AND,
  • ACTED WILLFULLY: You acted willfully;[5] AND,
  • ACTED MALICIOUSLY: You acted maliciously.[6]

Note: “A person does not commit arson if the only thing burned is his or her own personal property, unless he or she acts with the intent to defraud, or the fire also injures someone else or someone else's structure, forest land, or property.”[7]

Example: Defendant Deke intends on burning Victim Vince's house. He takes the newspaper from his own driveway. Then he stands in the middle of the public street, sets the paper on fire, and prepares to lob the fire at the house. But Deke decides against the act and stomps out the paper in the street. Vince sees all of this. He calls police. Deke is arrested and charged under CPC §451. Should Deke be acquitted?

Conclusion: Deke willfully and maliciously set fire to property. These are the elements of the crime as charged. However, Deke set fire to his own property, not Vince's property. Then Deke stomped out the fire in the middle of a public street, thereby altogether avoiding Vince's house and driveway. Therefore, while Deke initially intended on destroying Vince's home, Deke should be acquitted of the charge.

Penalties For Arson Under CPC §451

If you're convicted of Arson resulting in great bodily injury, the penalty may be:

  • A term of up to nine (9) years in a state prison;[8] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[9]

As noted, if you're convicted of Arson resulting in great bodily injury, the penalty may be a term of up to nine (9) years in a state prison,[10] or a fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars), [11] or both a fine and imprisonment.[12]

Note: As a “serious felony,” Arson is publishable under California's ‘Three Strikes' system.[13] If you accrue three “strikes” on your record, you will serve a minimum of twenty-five (25) years in a state prison.[14]

Defenses Against California Penal Code §451 – Arson

Three common defenses against a charge of Arson under CPC §451 are:

Arson Didn't Produce The Fire

Example: Defendant Dale is cooking French fries on Victim Veronica's stovetop. He's using lard. As Dale heats the fat, the lard gets so hot that is begins to spatter, sending scalding hot globules flying out of the saucepan. Some of these land on Veronica's curtains. They're set afire. Furious, Veronica reports Dale for a violation of §451. Now he's facing charges. Should Dale be convicted, under these circumstances?

Conclusion: While Dale was present when Veronica's curtains were set ablaze, Dale made no willful act to produce the fire. He was making fries. The lard he was using reacted to heat in a way that he couldn't control. The fat, in turn, started the curtains on fire. Dale did nothing at any point to the curtains. Dale, it follows, should be acquitted. Arson didn't produce the fire that damaged Veronica's property.

You Didn't Act Willfully

Example: Defendant Derrick falls asleep while he's smoking a cigarette. The cigarette starts a fire that burns down his house and the house of Victim Valeria, his neighbor. Now Derrick faces a charge under CPC §451 for burning down Valeria's home. He insists he can't be convicted on these facts. Is he correct?

Conclusion: Derrick accidentally and unconsciously started a fire that burned down two houses by sleeping while holding a lit cigarette. Under these circumstances, the only element of the charge is destruction of property. The fire wasn't started through an act which can be described as intentional. Derrick, thus, is correct. He can't be convicted because he didn't act willfully.

You Weren't Trying To Commit Fraud

Example: Defendant Dominica inherits a remote piece of land. It includes an abandoned house. Dominica decides that it would be cheaper to burn the house than dismantle it. Local law permits her to set a fire to burn the house. She does so. But Sheriff sees the fire. Upon investigating, she concludes that Dominica was trying to commit insurance fraud. Sheriff charges her under CPC §451. Is Dominica guilty?

Conclusion: Dominica simply wanted to dispose of real property in the cheapest way permissible. Local law allowed her to burn the property. She chose to burn the house. Thus, though Sheriff believed Dominica was trying to cheat an insurer, Dominica is innocent. She wasn't trying to commit fraud. 

Related Offenses

Note: The crimes below are described generally as “related” because they're frequently charged with CPC §451 and/or have common elements the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

The California Penal Code includes several offenses related to Arson: Murder (CPC §187), Burglary (CPC §459), Trespass (CPC §602(m)), Vandalism (CPC §§594(a)(1)-(3)), Looting (CPC §463(a)) and Reckless Burning (CPC §452).

Murder

Murder (CPC §187) is defined as “the unlawful killing of a human being, or a fetus, with malice aforethought.”[15] Malice must be formed before the act causing the death. It doesn't require ill will toward the victim, nor does it the passage of any particular period. Murder is related to Arson because starting a fire that kills a human being could permit charges alleging both crimes in the same trial.

Murder exists in first- and second-degree forms. If you're convicted of first-degree Murder under CPC §187, the penalty may be:

  • A term of life in a state prison without the possibility of parole;[16] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[17]

California Jury Instructions – Murder

To convict you under CPC §187, the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You committed an act that caused the death of another person or a fetus or you had a legal duty to help   a person and failed to perform that duty, causing the death of another person or a fetus. When you acted, or failed to act, you had a state of mind called malice aforethought. Finally, you killed without lawful excuse or justification.

Example: Defendant Donni's husband, Victim Vinton, dies in a house fire. She's charged under §187. At trial, she claims Vinton died while trapped in a bathroom behind a window she'd boarded-up because he'd broken it earlier, and that kerosene in the hallway outside the bathroom was accidental.[18] Jurors convict her. She says they must believe her; she presented an explanation for the death. Is she correct?

Conclusion: While the prosecution in a criminal trial must prove charges beyond a reasonable doubt, this doesn't mean that jurors must accept as “reasonable” every story defendants present in explaining their actions. The jury is permitted to disbelieve and convict Donni when she explains her case, just as they're permitted to convict Donni if she elects not to present any sort of defense. Thus, Donni is incorrect.     

Burglary

Penal Code §459 creates the crime of Burglary, which occurs any time someone enters a building with the intent to commit a theft or a felony inside the structure. The crime is related to Arson because committing a burglary and burning anything within the structure burglarized could permit charges alleging both crimes in the same trial.

Burglaries inside homes, floating vessels, or trailers are first-degree burglaries. All other forms are in the second degree. This makes Burglary a “wobbler” offense.[19] If you're convicted of Burglary in the first degree, the penalty can be:

  • A term of up to six (6) years in a state prison;[20] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[21]

Note:  You must form the intent commit the burglary at or before the time of entering the structure.

More information can be found in the Burglary Lawyer section of the Kann California Law Group's website. If you have questions, contact any of the Kann California Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County.  An attorney will take your call. That's guaranteed.

California Jury Instructions – Burglary

To convict you under CPC §459, the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You entered a building, a locked vehicle, or a structure while intending to commit a felony or a theft involving property worth more than $950, or you entered a noncommercial establishment, or you entered a commercial establishment outside business hours with the same intent.

Example: Defendant Deedee knows that Victim Val is storing an ounce-sized bag of marijuana in Val's glove compartment. Deedee breaks into Val's car and steals the bag. Security cameras record it. Deedee is charged later with a violation of §459. She says that she must be acquitted, even though she stole the bag, because the marijuana was worth $300. Is she correct or should she be convicted, on these facts?  

Conclusion: Deedee broke into Val's car. It's reasonable to assume, therefore, that the car was locked. She also intended on committing a theft. These are elements of the offense. But the theft had to involve property worth more than $950. As the facts make clear, the marijuana was valued at significantly less. Deedee, it follows, is correct. She should be acquitted (although she could be convicted of Petty Theft).

Trespass

Trespass (CPC §602(m)) occurs when a building or property is entered without the owner's permission.  While it is usually punished as a misdemeanor, Trespass can be joined with an offense like Assault to aggravate the sentence in a criminal trial, if the facts are right. The crime is related to Arson because committing an arson while trespassing can result in charges alleging both in the same trial.

If you're convicted of Trespass, the penalty may be:

  • A term up to one (1) year in a county jail; OR,
  • A fine up to $2,000 (two-thousand dollars); OR
  • Both a fine and imprisonment. [22]

You can always find more information in the California Trespassing Lawyer section of the Kann California Defense Group's website. If you have questions, contact any of the Kann Defense Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County. Your call will always go directly to a lawyer – guaranteed.

California Jury Instructions – Trespass

To convict you under CPC §602(m), the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You willfully entered land or a building belonging to someone else without the consent of the owner, the owner's agent, or the person who had lawful possession of the property. You also occupied the land or building continuously until you were removed.

Example: Defendant Dolly's air conditioning is broken on a hot day. Victim Vera, her neighbor, has a large pool in Vera's backyard. Dolly decides to take a swim in the pool. She jumps over a fence and begins to do laps in the pool. Vera hears the splashing sound and calls police. They arrest Dolly next door, Dolly having returned home by then, and charge her under CPC §602(m). Should she be innocent?

Conclusion: Dolly willfully entered Vera's land without Vera's consent. These are elements of the crime. But Dolly didn't remain on Vera's land until police arrived; they arrested Dolly inside Dolly's home. Trespass, on these facts, would require Dolly's remaining continuously on Vera's land until Dolly's removal by police. Dolly, it follows, should be innocent.

Vandalism

Vandalism (CPC §§594(a)(1)-(3)) occurs whenever any person maliciously defaces, damages, or destroys real or personal property that that person does not own. Defacement includes making any “unauthorized inscription, word, figure, mark, or design, that is written, marked, etched, scratched, drawn, or painted on real or personal property.”[23] Arson itself may be a form of vandalism, thus making it possible to face charges of committing both crimes in the same trial.

Penal Code §§594(a)(1)-(3) is a “wobbler”[24] offense in California. You can be charged with either a Felony or a Misdemeanor violation of the law, depending on the value of the property allegedly damaged. If you are guilty of Vandalism resulting in at least $10,000 in damage, the penalty, without enhancement, may be:

  • A term of up to three (3) years in a state prison;[25] OR,
  • A fine of up to $50,000 (fifty-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[26]

Note: California's “Three Strikes” law may also apply to a conviction under CPC §§594(a)(1)-(3), since vandalism can trigger application of CPC §1170(h).[27] In the event that you receive three “strikes,” you'll be sentenced to at least twenty-five years in a state prison.[28]

You can always find more information in the California Vandalism Lawyers section of the Kann California Defense Group's website. If you have questions, contact any of the Kann Defense Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County. Your call will always go directly to a lawyer. Guaranteed.

California Jury Instructions – Vandalism

To convict you under CPC §§594(a)(1)-(3), the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You maliciously defaced (with graffiti or with other inscribed material), damaged, or destroyed real or

personal property. You did not own the property or own the property with someone else. Finally, the amount of damage caused by the vandalism was valued at $400 or more.

Example: While Defendant Drake wants to damage Victim Verona's car, he doesn't want to be charged with Vandalism. Drake decides against spray-painting or writing on the vehicle for this reason. Instead, he drags a key along the side of Verona's car, scratching it. This results in $450 worth of damage. Verona finds out and has Drake charged under CPC §594(a)(2). He insists he didn't vandalize. Is Drake guilty?

Conclusion: Drake didn't not own Verona's car. He caused damage greater than $400 when he dragged his key along the car. The key damaged the car. (Damage is covered subpart (2) of the statute.) These are the elements of the offense. Drake believed wrongly that he had to write or paint something on the car, were he to commit vandalism under the law. He was wrong. Drake, thus, is guilty of the accusation. 

Looting

California law (CPC §463(a)) makes it illegal to commit Burglary during an official emergency or after declaration of an evacuation order. This crime is known as Looting. The declaration or emergency order had to have originated with an “earthquake, fire, flood, riot, or other natural or manmade disaster.”[29] Arson is related to Looting because a theft occurring in conjunction with an act of arson makes it possible to charge you with both crimes in the same trial.

If you're guilty of Vandalism resulting in at least $10,000 in damage, the penalty, without enhancement, may be:

  • A term of up to three (3) years in a state prison;[30] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[31]

Note: Since the crime can be punished under CPC §1170(h), Looting is part of California's “Three Strikes” system.[32] If you accrue three “strikes” on your record, you'll serve a minimum of twenty-five (25) years in a state prison.[33]

You can always find more information in the Looting Laws section of the Kann California Law Group's website. If you have questions, contact any of the Kann California Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County. Your call will always go directly to a lawyer. Guaranteed.

California Jury Instructions – Looting

To convict you under CPC §463(a), the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You committed Burglary during a state of emergency or during an evacuation order issued after an earthquake, fire, flood, riot, or other disaster. Additionally, you committed the crime during or within an affected area.

Example: Defendant Damian's neighborhood is threatened by a brush fire. An evacuation order has been issued. Damian evacuates his belongings. But, remembering that he left something essential, he returns to the house. Firemen see him leave his house while holding a computer. They report him to police. Now Damian faces charges under §463(a). He swears that he can't be guilty. Is Damian correct?

Conclusion: Damian took property from his house while an evacuation order was in effect. The house was in an area affected by the brush fire; this can be deduced from firemen being on the street. But Damian couldn't burglarize his own home. As owner, he has the right to enter and leave, so he can never enter the house without the owner's permission. Damian, it follows, is correct. He should be acquitted.   

Reckless Burning

Penal Code §452 makes it illegal to burn recklessly, or to cause to be burned, any structure, forest land, or property. Unlike Section 451, Reckless Burning requires no finding of malicious intent on your part. The crime is related to Arson because Reckless Burning is the second of California's two laws dealing with destruction of property by fire.

Penal Code §452 is a “wobbler”[34] offense in California. You can be charged with either a felony or a misdemeanor violation of the law, depending on the value of the type of property you damage and whether it causes someone great bodily harm. If you're guilty of Reckless Burning resulting in great bodily harm, the penalty, without enhancement, may be:

  • A term of up to six (6) years in a state prison;[35] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars);[36] OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[37]

California Jury Instructions – Reckless Burning

To convict you under CPC §452, the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You recklessly set a fire, or burned, or you caused the burning of a structure, forest land, or property.

Example: Defendant Dmitri is a smoker. He doesn't clean out the ashtray in his car very often. One day, Dmitri is driving and smoking. He goes to stub out his cigarette but can't find ashtray space. He flicks the cigarette out the window. Witnesses later connect him to a forest fire created by the cigarette. Dmitri is facing charges under §452(c). He insists that he can't be convicted for an “accident.” Is Dmitri guilty? 

Conclusion: Dmitri threw a burning cigarette from his window while driving. Under these circumstances, he couldn't exercise control over whether the cigarette started a fire. But it was his duty to avoid doing anything which could be described as “reckless” that leads to a fire. Clearly, tossing a burning cigarette out a window could be “reckless” behavior. It also resulted in a fire. Dmitri, thus, is incorrect and guilty.

What Can I Do If I'm Charged With Arson?

The State of California treats Arson as a serious offense. If you're charged with Arson, it's essential that you retain a skilled, dedicated criminal defense attorney as soon as possible. Your rights, freedom, and livelihood are at stake.

Remember, a professional criminal defense attorney may be able to:

  • Negotiate a lesser charge in a plea bargain;
  • Reduce your sentence;
  • Or even get charges dismissed completely.

The attorneys at the Kann California Law Group have an excellent understanding of the local courts and an extensive knowledge of California's criminal justice system. We can represent you in Ventura, Santa Clarita, Los Angeles, Encino, Pasadena and many other Southern California cities. 

If you or someone you know has been arrested for, or charged with, Arson, our attorneys will analyze the facts of your case and plan a strategy that will help you obtain the best possible outcome.

Contact the Kann California Law Group today to schedule your free and confidential consultation.

References

[1] “To set fire to or burn means to damage or destroy with fire either all or part of something, no matter how small the part.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1515 (CALCRIM) (2020).

[2] “A structure is any building, bridge, tunnel, power plant, commercial or public tent.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1515 (CALCRIM) (2020).

[3] “Forest land means brush-covered land, cut-over land, forest, grasslands, or woods.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1515 (CALCRIM) (2020).

[4] “Property means personal property or land other than forest land.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1515 (CALCRIM) (2020).

[5] “Someone commits an act willfully when he or she does it willingly or on purpose.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1515 (CALCRIM) (2020).

[6] “Someone acts maliciously when he or she intentionally does a wrongful act or when he or she acts with the unlawful intent to defraud, annoy, or injure someone else.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1515 (CALCRIM) (2020).

[7] See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1515 (CALCRIM) (2020).

[8] See California Penal Code [CPC] §451 (a).

[9] See CPC §672.

[10] See Endnote 8.

[11] See Endnote 9.

[12] If you're convicted of any felony act of arson, the court may, in addition to the basic penalty, “impose a fine not to exceed fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) unless a greater amount is provided by law.” See CPC §456 (a).

[13] See CPC §§1192.7 (a) (1), (c) (14).

[14] See CPC §667 (e) (2) (A) (ii).

[15] See CPC §187.

[16] See CPC §190 (a).

[17] See Endnote 9.

[18] Fact pattern based on the first murder committed by Karl Karlsen, who murdered two family members in staged accidents and claimed insurance payments for their deaths. See “His wife died in a house fire. His son was crushed under a truck. A jury finds it was all part of the plan.” By Megan Flynn. The Washington Post.com, February 6, 2020.

[19] See “Wobbler Law and Legal Definition” definition at USLegal.com. 

[20] See CPC §461 (a).

[21] See Endnote 9.

[22] See CPC §602 (x) (2) (C).  

[23] See CPC §594 (e).

[24] See Endnote 19.

[25] See CPC §18 (a).

[26] See CPC §594 (b) (1).

[27] See version [(Amended (as amended by Stats. 2018, Ch. 1001, Sec. 2) by Stats. 2020, Ch. 29, Sec. 15.)]

[28] See Endnote 13.

[29] See CPC §463 (a).

[30] See Endnote 25.

[31] See Endnote 9.

[32] See CPC §§1192.7 (c) (7).

[33] See Endnote 13.

[34] See Endnote 19.

[35] See CPC §452 (a).

[36] See Endnote 9.

[37] See Endnote 12.

Menu