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

California Penal Code § (Section) 314(1) – Indecent Exposure

California Penal Code § (Section) 314(1)

California Penal Code (CPC) §314(1) – Indecent Exposure – In California, the crime of Indecent Exposure occurs when a person exposes his or her naked body or genitals in front of anyone who could be annoyed or offended by it. While most people think it only happens in public, Indecent Exposure can happen in just about any environment. The exposure, however, must be willful and lewd.

Penalties for Indecent Exposure vary. A first conviction will likely result in a Misdemeanor sentence of six months in a county jail and/or a fine of up to one-thousand dollars. A second offense will be treated as a Felony and could result in a State prison term. If you're convicted of Felony Indecent Exposure you must register as sex offenders for a minimum of ten years.

What Does California Penal Code §314(1) (Indecent Exposure) Prohibit?

In sum, to be guilty of Indecent Exposure under California Penal Code §314(1), you must:

  • Intentionally expose your genitals or naked body;
  • Expose yourself in front of someone who might be offended or annoyed by it;
  • Intend to direct attention to yourself; AND,
  • Intend to sexually gratify yourself or offend someone else when you do it.

Defining “Indecent Exposure” Under California Penal Code §314(1)

To convict you under §314(1), the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

  • Willfully: You intended to do what was necessary to break the law;[1] AND,
  • Expose Yourself: You exposed your naked body (your “person” [2]) or genitals (your “private parts”); AND,
  • In The Presence Of Someone Who Might Be Offended/Annoyed: You exposed your naked body or genitals near a person who might be offended or annoyed by it; AND,
  • Intending To Direct Attention To Yourself/Your Genitals: You exposed your naked body or  genitals believing you would be seen (even if no one actually saw the exposure)[3]; AND,
  • For Sexual Arousal Or Offense: You exposed your naked body or genitals for your own sexual gratification, someone else's, or to sexually offend someone else (also known as “lewd”[4] intent).

An example of Indecent Exposure might prove helpful.

Example: Defendant Devlin, who's attracted to his next door neighbor, Victim Vanessa, decides to pace naked in front of his window, hoping that Vanessa will see him through her adjacent window. He finds the thought of Vanessa seeing his naked body arousing and believes that if he stands there long enough, Vanessa will see him. But Vanessa only sees enough to know that Devlin is trying to expose himself to her before she calls the police. Could Devlin be convicted of violating California Penal Code §314(1)?

Conclusion:  Devlin presented his naked body to Vanessa for his own sexual gratification. He believed that pacing in front of the window would draw attention to his nudity. He did all of this willingly. Furthermore, Vanessa was offended by Devlin's behavior. It doesn't matter that she saw only enough to know he was trying to expose himself. On these facts Devlin can be convicted of violating CPC §314(1).

Penalties Under California Penal Code §314(1)

Misdemeanor Indecent Exposure may be punished with six months in a county jail, a fine of up to $1,000,[5] and the obligation to register as a Sex Offender[6] for at least ten years. 

A Felony conviction for Indecent Exposure can occur when aggravating facts are present. Section 314(1) allows the prosecutor to charge you with a Felony if you expose yourself inside a home or “inhabited” building.[7] This makes §314(1) a “wobbler”:[8] the prosecution can charge you with a Felony or a Misdemeanor, depending on the facts.[9] If you're charged with a Misdemeanor form of Aggravated Indecent Exposure, the penalty is the same as above except that the maximum jail sentence is one year.

If you're charged with Felony Indecent Exposure, the penalty can be sixteen months, two years, or three years in a state prison,[10] up to $10,000 in fines,[11] and the duty to register as a Sex Offender for a minimum of ten years. You will be charged with Felony Indecent Exposure if you're convicted of violating CPC §314 more than once or if you're convicted of violating Section 314 after you've been convicted of Lewd Acts With A Minor, a violation of California Penal Code §288.

Note: Most professional organizations requiring licenses in California will consider discipline for anyone convicted of Indecent Exposure who also holds a professional license in the state. This doesn't, however, mean that you have to give up your license. Misdemeanor convictions are an exception to the general disciplinary approach, which would otherwise involve the possibility of losing your professional license.[12]

Defenses To California Penal Code §314(1) – Indecent Exposure

There are several good defenses available to someone accused of Indecent Exposure, such as:

The Evidence Was Insufficient For Conviction

Example:  Defendant Donald has a fetish for exposing himself in public parks. He goes to a park wearing nothing more than a trench coat. He arrives at the park, gets out of his car, and, assuming someone will see him, opens his coat, revealing his naked body. Much to Donald's dismay, no one is there to see him. He closes the coat. Just then a police officer appears and arrests him for suspected violation of §314(1). Should Donald be convicted of Indecent Exposure?

Conclusion: Donald intended to be seen naked in public for his own sexual gratification, which is “lewd” behavior. He also displayed his naked body in public at a time when he believed he would be seen. However, no one was there to be offended by the display, making the evidence insufficient. If even one element of a charge can't be proven by the State, the defendant must be acquitted. Therefore, while every other element of Indecent Exposure is present, Donald can't be convicted of violating §314(1).

The Accusation Is False

Example: Defendant Denise is divorcing her spouse, Victim Violet, who threatens to accuse Denise of deriving sexual pleasure from intentionally exposing herself in front of their two children unless Denise consents to giving Violet custody of the kids. Denise has never done anything of the kind. Violet complains to the police. Denise is arrested for Indecent Exposure. Should Denise be convicted of violating CPC §314(1)?

Conclusion: Even though Violet might be able to allege facts that would otherwise amount to Indecent Exposure, Denise can't be convicted of violating §314(1) because Violet hasn't told the truth.[13] As the facts state, Denise never exposed herself to the children. Violet made a false accusation because she wants custody. Denise has to be acquitted. If not, she would be convicted of a crime she didn't commit.

It's A Case Of Mistaken Identity

Example:  Defendant Dick has an identical twin brother named Dirk. Victim Velma was Dirk's girlfriend until recently, when their relationship ended in an ugly argument. Dirk decided to assault Velma as revenge. He leapt naked into her path from behind a bush one night and yelled “You shouldn't have dumped my brother!” Then Dirk chased Velma back to her house. Later Velma accused Dick of Indecent Exposure and Dick was arrested. Should Dick be convicted under §314(1)? 

Conclusion: While a good case for Indecent Exposure can be made on these facts, Defendant Dick can't be convicted. A person should never be convicted of a crime he or she didn't commit - but that's exactly what would happen if a case of mistaken identity were to result in a conviction. Here Dirk used the fact that he has an identical twin brother, pretending to be Dick, in order to attack Velma. Dick actually had nothing to do with Dirk's crime. Since Victim Velma identified the wrong brother, Dick must be innocent.

More information can be found in the Sex Offense 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.

Related Offenses

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

The California Penal Code contains several offenses related to Indecent Exposure: Lewd Conduct With A Minor (§288), Burglary (§459), Trespass (§602) and Lewd Conduct In Public (§647(a)). In the following paragraphs each is discussed in detail.

Lewd Conduct With A Minor

The crime of Lewd Conduct With A Minor (CPC §288) occurs when an adult engages in a sex act with a minor under fourteen (Section (a)) or a minor who's fourteen or fifteen and a minimum of ten years younger than the adult (Section (c)). Section 288 is written so that prosecutors can charge differently, depending on the ages of the victim and defendant.[14] This makes Lewd Conduct With a Minor a “wobbler”[15] crime in California.

If you're convicted of Lewd Conduct With A Minor under fourteen (a Felony), the penalty may be:

  • A term in the state prison of three (3), six (6), or eight (8) years;[16] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand) dollars;[17] OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.

If you're convicted of Lewd Conduct With A Minor who's fourteen or fifteen and at least ten years younger than yourself, the Felony conviction penalty may be:

  • A term in the state prison of one (1), two (2), or three (3) years;[18] OR
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand) dollars;[19] OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.

If you're convicted of Lewd Conduct With A Minor who's fourteen or fifteen and at least ten years younger than yourself, the Misdemeanor conviction penalty may be:

  • A term in the county jail of up to one (1) year;[20] OR,
  • A fine of up to $1,000 (one-thousand dollars);[21] OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.

Note: Section 288 also requires some kind of touching “with the intent of arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of [the adult] or the child” for the law to be broken - but actual arousal isn't required. Additionally, it is not a defense that the minor consented to the act.[22]

More information can be found in the Sex Offense 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.

California Jury Instructions – Lewd Conduct With A Minor

To convict you under §288(a) , the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You willfully touched a part of a child's body on the bare skin or through the clothing OR you got a child to touch your body, the child's own body, or someone else's body on bare skin or through the clothing. The prosecutor must also show that you acted intending to gratify your sexual desires or the desire of the child. Finally, the prosecutor must prove the child was under the age of 14 at the time of the act.

Example:  Defendant Diego is caught caressing the bare leg of ten year old Victim Valentina, one of his two stepdaughters.[23] Confronted about his behavior by his wife, he admits to being sexually attracted to Valentina and says he hopes she'll feel the same way for him. Valentina's mother reports Diego to the police, who arrest him for Lewd Conduct With A Minor. Should Diego be convicted of violating §288(a)?

Conclusion: Diego admitted that he was sexually aroused by touching Valentina's bare leg. Valentina was only ten years of age at the time. Therefore Diego could be convicted of violating CPC §288(a).

To convict you under §288(a), the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You willfully touched a part of a child's body on the bare skin or through the clothing OR you got a child to touch your body, the child's own body, or someone else's body on bare skin or through the clothing.

The prosecutor must also prove that you intended to gratify your sexual desires or the desires of the child. The prosecutor must show that the child was fourteen or fifteen years old at the time of the act.

Lastly, the prosecutor must show that the child was at least ten years younger than yourself when you acted.

Example: Defendant Damian is a nineteen year old who is one year out of high school. He meets a fourteen year old high school freshman, Victim Vannie, and begins a secret relationship with her. One day, Vannie's parents catch Vannie rubbing Damian's bared arms. Vannie's furious parents report Damian. He's charged with violating §288(c) of the CPC. Should Damian be convicted of the crime?

Conclusion:  While we can assume that Vannie touched Damian's bare skin for mutual sexual pleasure - and Vannie was fourteen at the time of the act - Damian is only five years older than Vannie. It doesn't matter that she's still in high school. It doesn't matter that Vannie's parents don't approve of Damian dating their daughter. Damian must be at least ten years older than Vannie to violate §288(c). He should not be convicted on these facts.[24]            

Disturbing The Peace

 

Disturbing The Peace (CPC §415) occurs in California whenever anyone unlawfully fights or challenges another person to fight in public, or intentionally disturbs another person with unreasonable noise, or uses offensive words likely to provoke a violent reaction in a public place.[25]

If you're convicted of Disturbing The Peace as a misdemeanor, the penalties may be:

  • A term in the county jail of up to 90 (ninety) days; OR,
  • A fine of up to $400 (four hundred dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[26]

Disturbing The Peace can also be charged as an infraction. Unlike misdemeanor charges, infractions carry no jail time and no probation. If you are convicted of Disturbing The Peace as an infraction, the only penalty that the court can impose is a fine. Often times an experienced criminal defense attorney can negotiate a misdemeanor Disturbing The Peace charge down to an infraction thereby avoiding possible jail time and probation for his or her client.

Note: Disturbing The Peace is related to Indecent Exposure because the crimes can involve similar objectionable public behavior. An experienced criminal defense attorney will sometimes negotiate a Disturbing The Peace charge in an effort to having his or her client plead to a lesser offense, often to avoid registering as a Sex Offender.          

More information can be found in the Disturbing The Peace 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.

California Jury Instructions – Disturbing The Peace

Note: While the statute creates a single crime, the prosecutor must prove different things to convict you under §415(1) (fighting), §415(2) (making unreasonable noise), or §415(3) (use of offensive words).

To convict you under §415(1), the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You unlawfully fought or challenged someone to fight. The prosecutor must also prove that you and the other person were in a public place or building when the fight occurred or the challenge was made.

Example: Defendant Derek has a long-standing feud with his neighbor, Victim Viktor. One day the men get into yet another argument - but this time Derek gets so angry that he pursues Viktor into Viktor's house, where he challenges Viktor to a fistfight. Viktor refuses and calls the police. Should Derek be convicted of violating CPC §415(1)?

Conclusion: Derek did in fact challenge Viktor to a fight, which goes a long way in proving a violation of the law. But Derek challenged Viktor in the privacy of Viktor's own home. The challenge must be made in a public place or public building. Therefore, Derek shouldn't be convicted of violating CPC §415(1).[27]

To convict you under §415(2), the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You maliciously[28] disturbed another person by causing loud and unreasonable noise.[29]

Example:  Defendant Deena likes to listen to the music of her sister Sheena, a punk rocker, at high volume. Deena has no need to do it; she just likes loud music. Her next door neighbor, Victim Val, is often trying to sleep when Deena puts on one of Sheena's records. Val eventually threatens to call the police if Deena doesn't keep it down. In retaliation, Deena starts playing Sheena's records as loudly as she can at all hours, keeping Val awake. Val reports Deena. Should Deena be convicted under §415(2)?

Conclusion: Deena isn't trying to communicate anything, nor is she hard of hearing. These would be reasons for the volume. Deena just does it because she likes it and ignores its impact on her neighbor, Val, who's trying to sleep (something well within her rights). When Val confronts her about it, Deena maliciously plays her music loudly to disturb Val. Deena should be convicted of violating CPC §415(2).

To convict you under §415(3), the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You used offensive words that were inherently likely to provoke an immediate violent reaction. [30] The prosecutor must also prove that, when you used those words, you were in a public place or building.

Example:  Defendant Donnie and Victim Vinton witnessed a car accident involving Vinton's teenaged son. Vinton was caring for his dying son on the side of the road when an ambulance arrived and put Vinton's son on a stretcher. That's when Donnie appeared at Vinton's shoulder and sneered, “Too bad! Your kid deserves to die, Vinton!” Vinton immediately became enraged, lashed out physically at Donnie, and then reported Donnie for Disturbing The Peace. Should Donnie be convicted of violating §415(3)?

Conclusion: Taunting Vinton - a father caring for his dying son on the side of the road after witnessing the boy get in a car accident - could easily be described as using words “inherently likely to provoke” Vinton's violent reaction. Assuming that Donnie's statement was made while standing on a public road, nothing more need be shown to convict Donnie of violating CPC §415(3).[31]

[415.5?]

Burglary

 

CPC §459 describes the crime of Burglary, which occurs any time someone enters a building with the intent to commit a theft or felony inside the structure. Burglaries inside homes, vessels, floating homes or trailers are first degree burglaries. All other forms of Burglary are in the second degree.[32] This means that burglarizing a structure like a business is a “wobbler” offense.[33]

If you're convicted of Burglary in the first degree, the penalty can be:

  • A term in the state prison of two (2), four (4), or six (6) years.[34]

If you're convicted of Burglary in the second degree as a misdemeanor, the penalty can be:

  • A term in county jail up to one (1) year.[35]

If you're convicted of Burglary in the second degree as a felony, the penalty can be:

              * A term in county jail for sixteen (16) months, two (2) years, or three (3) years.

Note: Burglary requires entering a structure and intending to commit a theft or felony. The burglar must form the intent to commit a theft or felony at or before the time of entering the structure.[36] However, if you enter an inhabited building[37] and expose your naked body or genitals, you can be charged with Aggravated Indecent Exposure,[38] punishable by a year in prison and a fine of up to $1,000,[39] in addition to a charge like Burglary.

More information can be found in the Burglary 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.   

California Jury Instructions – Burglary

To convict you under §459, the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you entered a building, a locked vehicle, or a structure. The prosecutor must also show that you entered intending to commit theft or a felony involving property worth more than $950, or that you entered a noncommercial establishment, or that you entered a commercial establishment.

Example: Defendant Douglas hides on Victim Vern's house boat. Vern is on the boat at the time. When Douglas encounters Vern, he decides to remove his clothes and expose himself. Vern reports Douglas for Burglary after Douglas does it. Should Douglas be convicted of violating CPC §459?

Conclusion: Douglas definitely trespassed onto Vern's private houseboat and exposed his naked body. He can be convicted of Aggravated Indecent Exposure. Douglas can't, however, be convicted of Burglary. He didn't form the intent to commit another crime until he'd actually trespassed onto Vern's houseboat.

Trespass

 

The crime of Trespass (CPC §602) occurs in California whenever a building or property is entered without the owner's permission. It's usually punished as a Misdemeanor but it can be coupled with offenses like Indecent Exposure to aggravate the sentence.[40] Trespass is also sometimes used as leverage to get a defendant to plead guilty to a charge of some kind when the prosecutor doesn't have enough evidence of intent to commit Indecent Exposure (CPC §314) inside a house or building or a Burglary (CPC §459).

If you're convicted of violating §602, the penalties may be:

  • A fine up to $2,000 (two-thousand dollars);[41] OR
  • A term in the county jail up to one (1) year;[42] OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[43]

More information can be found in the 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.

California Jury Instructions – Trespass

To convict you under §602, 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,[44] or the person who had lawful possession of the property. The prosecutor must also prove that you occupied the land or building without the consent of the owner, the owner's agent, or the person in lawful possession of the property. Finally, the prosecutor must show that you occupied some part of the land or building continuously until you were removed.

Example:  Defendant Dottie loses a ball somewhere on Victim Valerie's uncut front lawn. Dottie enters Valerie's property by climbing over a fence and starts to look for the ball in the tall grass. Valerie, seeing this, opens her window and yells for Dottie to vacate her land, but Dottie ignores her and keeps looking until Valerie calls the police, who remove Dottie from the yard themselves. Valerie now charges Dottie with Trespass. Should Dottie be convicted of violation of §602?

Conclusion: While briefly looking for a possession on someone else's property may seem an incidental thing, Dottie wasn't on Valerie's land with Valerie's consent. She climbed over a fence (an act of willful entrance), continued to occupy the land even after being told to leave (continuous occupation), and stayed there until removed by the police. On these facts, Dottie should be convicted of violating §602.

 

Lewd Conduct In Public

 

The crime of Lewd Conduct In Public (CPC §647(a)) occurs in California whenever a person touches him- or herself (or someone else) sexually in public. The touching must involve genitals, breasts, or buttocks. There must be someone who could be offended present and the defendant must know or suspect this. 

If you're convicted of violating §647(a), the penalty may be:

  • A term in the county jail of up to six (6) months;[45] OR,
  • A fine of up to $1,000 (one-thousand dollars);[46] OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.

Note: As with §288, actual touching is required to violate §647(a) - but you can be charged with both Indecent Exposure and Lewd Conduct In Public, if the facts are right. The prosecutor may try to add the Indecent Exposure charge to get you to plead guilty to Lewd Conduct In Public. Since §647(a) is a Misdemeanor that doesn't require Sex Offender registration, prosecutors have been known to try this strategy to pressure defendants into lesser pleadings, whether the pleadings are warranted or not.

More information is available in the Lewd Conduct Defense 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.   

California Jury Instructions – Lewd Conduct In Public

To convict you under §647(a), the prosecutor must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You willfully touched your - or another person's - genitals, buttocks, or (female) breast. The prosecutor must also show that you intended to sexually gratify yourself, or someone else, or to annoy or offend another person. The prosecutor must show that, at the time you did it, you were in a public place or a place open to public view. The prosecutor must prove that someone else who might've been offended was present. Finally, the prosecutor must show that you knew or should've known that another person who might've been offended was present.

Example:  Defendant Danica is walking past a busy park just as the underwire in her bra comes loose and pokes her in her side. Danica, responding to the sharp pain, cries out and reflexively pulls up her shirt to adjust the bra. As a result, she bares a breast. People nearby, some of whom hear her cry out, see her lift up her shirt. One such person is Victim Villem. Danica quickly adjusts her bra and covers herself but Villem reports her for Lewd Conduct In Public. Should Danica be convicted of violating CPC §647(a)?

Conclusion: Most of the elements of Lewd Conduct In Public are present here - Danica's bares her breast in a public place, others who might be offended are present, Danica knew they were present and Danica willfully touched herself when she did it. What is not present is the intent to sexually gratify or annoy anyone. Danica reflexively removed an article of clothing because she felt pain originating with the underwire. Therefore, while the other elements of the crime are present, Danica didn't violate §647(a).

What Can I Do If I'm Charged With Indecent Exposure?

The State of California regards sex crimes as serious offenses. If you're charged with Indecent Exposure, 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 Defense 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 or charged with Indecent Exposure, our attorneys will analyze the facts of your case and plan a defense strategy that will help you obtain the very best possible outcome.

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

References

[1] See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1160 (CALCRIM) (2017) (“Someone commits an act willfully when he or she does it willingly or on purpose. It is not required that he or she intend to break the law, hurt someone else, or gain any advantage”) (emphases added).

[2] See People v. Massicot (118 Cal.Rptr.2d 705 at 708 (2002)) (“[I]n order to expose the person within the plain meaning of the statute, one must ‘open to view' his or her body in its entirety, that is, in the nude”).

[3] “It is not required that another person actually see the exposed genitals.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1160 (CALCRIM) (2017).

[4] “Lewd behavior, sometimes known as ‘indecent behavior,' refers to many acts, with latitude given to the court as to whether an act is lewd or indecent. In most jurisdictions, indecent exposure, peeping, and lewd phone calls are the most common types of lewd behavior.” See “Lewd Acts: Types Of Lewd Behavior,” LegalDictionary.com (emphasis added).

[5] See CPC §19 ("Except in cases where a different punishment is prescribed by any law of this state, every offense declared to be a misdemeanor is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months, or by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both").

[6] California applied the Sex Offender Registration Act to Indecent Exposure in CPC §290 (“(c) The following persons shall register: Every person who, since July 1, 1944, has been or is hereafter convicted in any court in this state… [who] committed in the perpetration, or an attempt to perpetrate, […] any act punishable under… subdivision 1 or 2 of Section 314[ …]”).

[7] See Endnote 1, above.

[8] “In California, ‘Wobbler' refers to a criminal offense that can be classified as either a misdemeanor or a felony. It ‘wobbles' between these two categories of offenses. It signifies a lesser felony offense that specifies fines or jail time as alternative punishments to state prison.” See definition of “Wobbler Law” at USLegal.com.

[9] California also has a statute creating the crime of Failing To Register As A Sex Offender (CPC §290.018). If you violate Section 290.018, the penalty is based on the level of your conviction under §314. A Misdemeanor conviction produces a Misdemeanor violation of the duty to register as a Sex Offender, and vice-versa, if you've been convicted of a Felony. The penalty can range from one to three years in state prison.

[10] See CPC §18(a) ("Except in cases where a different punishment is prescribed by any law of this state, every offense declared to be a felony is punishable by imprisonment for 16 months, or two or three years in the state prison unless the offense is punishable pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170”).

[11] See CPC §672 (“Upon a conviction for any crime punishable by imprisonment in any jail or prison, in relation to which no fine is herein prescribed, the court may impose a fine on the offender not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000) in cases of misdemeanors or ten thousand dollars ($10,000) in cases of felonies, in addition to the imprisonment prescribed”).

[12] See California Business And Professions Code §1687(b)(2) (“This section shall not apply to any of the following: ...(2) An individual who is required to register as a sex offender pursuant to Section 290 of the Penal Code solely because of a misdemeanor conviction under Section 314 of the Penal Code. However, nothing in this paragraph shall prohibit the board from exercising its discretion to discipline a licensee under other provisions of state law based upon the licensee's conviction under Section 314 of the Penal Code").

[13] It's Victim Violet who could be charged with a crime (such as Attempted Extortion or Filing A False Police Report) on these facts.

[14] See §288(c)(1)(“ Any person who commits an act described in subdivision (a) with the intent described in that subdivision, and the victim is a child of 14 or 15 years, and that person is at least 10 years older than the child, is guilty of a public offense and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for one, two, or three years, or by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year. In determining whether the person is at least 10 years older than the child, the difference in age shall be measured from the birth date of the person to the birth date of the child”) (emphasis added).

[15] See Endnote 8, above.

[16] A still more serious form of this offense is established in §288(b)(1) (“Any person who commits an act described in subdivision (a) by use of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the victim or another person, is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 5, 8, or 10 years”) (emphasis added).

[17] See §288(e) (“Upon the conviction of any person for a violation of subdivision (a) or (b), the court may, in addition to any other penalty or fine imposed, order the defendant to pay an additional fine not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000)”).

[18] See Endnote 14, above.

[19] See CPC §672 (“Upon a conviction for any crime punishable by imprisonment in any jail or prison, in relation to which no fine is herein prescribed, the court may impose a fine on the offender not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000) in cases of misdemeanors or ten thousand dollars ($10,000) in cases of felonies, in addition to the imprisonment prescribed”).

[20] See Endnote 14, above.

[21] See Endnote 19, above.

[22] See California Criminal Jury Instructions (CALCRIM) 1110 (2017) (“[Actually arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of the perpetrator or the child is not required.  ¶It is not a defense that the child may have consented to the act”).

[23] Facts paralleling People v. Carbajal (56 Cal.4th 521, 155 Cal.Rptr.3d 335, 298 P.3d 835 (2013)) (Defendant appealed on issue of whether he could be properly retried on allegation of having multiple molestation victims).

[24] Given the fact that Vannie is fourteen, Damian also wouldn't be criminally liable under §288(a).

[25] CPC §415.5 also makes it a crime to fight “within any building or upon the grounds of any school, community college, university, or state university” or to challenge “another person within any building or upon the grounds to fight, or” to “(2) maliciously and willfully [disturb] another person within any of these buildings or upon the grounds by loud and unreasonable noise, or[,]” to “(3) [use] offensive words within any of these buildings or upon the grounds which are inherently likely to provoke an immediate violent reaction….”

[26] See CPC §415 (“[T]he following persons shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not more than 90 days, a fine of not more than four hundred dollars ($400), or both such imprisonment and fine…”).

[27] Derek could still be charged with other offenses, such as Trespass (§602) or Simple Assault (§240).

[28] “Someone acts maliciously when he or she intentionally does a wrongful act or when he or she acts with the unlawful intent to annoy or injure someone else.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 2689 (CALCRIM) (2017).

[29] “In order to disturb another person by causing loud and unreasonable noise, there must be either: 1. A clear and present danger of immediate violence; OR, 2. The noise must be used for the purpose of disrupting lawful activities, rather than as a means to communicate.” Same as above.

[30] “A person uses offensive words inherently likely to provoke an immediate violent reaction if: 1. He or she says something that is reasonably likely to provoke someone else to react violently; AND, 2. When he or she makes that statement, there is a clear and present danger that the other person will immediately erupt into violence.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 2690 (CALCRIM) (2017).

[31] “The People do not have to prove that the defendant intended to provoke a violent response.” Same as above.

[32] See CPC §460(a),(b) (defining first and second degree forms of Burglary).

[33] See CPC §461 (establishing penalties for first and second degree Burglary).

[34] See CPC §461(a) (establishing penalties for first degree Burglary).

[35] See CPC §461(b) (establishing penalty for second degree Burglary).

[36] See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1700 (CALCRIM) (2017) (“A burglary was committed if the defendant entered with the intent to commit theft or <one or more felonies>. The defendant does not need to have actually committed theft or <one or more felonies> as long as he or she entered with the intent to do so”) (emphasis added). (Instructions simplified for clarity.)

[37] “A house, part of a building, [or] trailer coach is inhabited if someone uses it as a dwelling, whether or not someone is inside at the time of the alleged indecent exposure. ¶A house, part of a building, [or] trailer coach is inhabited if someone used it as a dwelling and left only because a natural or other disaster caused him or her to leave. ¶A house, part of a building, or trailer coach is not inhabited if the former residents have moved out and do not intend to return, even if some personal property remains inside. ¶ A house includes any structure, garage, office, [or] <other description>) that is attached to the house and functionally connected with it.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 1160 (CALCRIM) (2017).

[38] “Every person who violates […] this section after having entered, without consent, an inhabited dwelling house, or trailer coach […], or the inhabited portion of any other building, is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison, or in the county jail not exceeding one year.” See CPC §314.

[39] See Endnote 5, above.

[40] See §602(3) (“This subdivision shall not be construed to preclude prosecution or punishment under any other law, including, but not limited to, grand theft or any provision that provides for a greater penalty or longer term of imprisonment”) (emphases added).

[41] See CPC §602 (detailing Trespass fines and circumstances for imposing fines).

[42] Same as above (detailing jail terms for Trespass and circumstances for imposing sentences).

[43] Same as above (detailing circumstances in which a court may impose both a fine and imprisonment).

[44] “An agent is a person who is authorized to act for someone else in dealings with third parties.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 2931 (CALCRIM) (2017).

[45] See Endnote 5, above.

[46] Same as above.

Menu