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

California Penal Code § 602(k) - Trespassing

California Penal Code § 602(k) - Trespassing

California Penal Code [CPC] §602(k)Trespassing – Section 602(k) of the Penal Code makes it illegal to enter land to damage property or property rights or to enter in order to interfere with a business or occupation carried on by the owner of the land, the owner's agent, or the lawful possessor of the land.

While Trespass under Section 602 may be an infraction, it's usually prosecuted as a misdemeanor. In that case, a conviction can result in a term of up to six months in a county jail, a fine of up to $1,000, or both imprisonment and a fine.

What Does California Penal Code §602(k) [Trespassing] Prohibit?

In sum, to be guilty of violating the Trespassing law under CPC §602(k), you must:

  • Enter land or a building belonging to someone else; AND,
  • Not have the consent to be there; AND,
  • Occupy the land or building without consent; AND,
  • Occupy some part of the land or building until you're removed.

Defining “Trespassing” Under California Penal Code §602(k)

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

  • WILLFULLY ENTERED: You willfully[1] entered land or a building belonging to someone else; AND,
  • ENTERED WITHOUT CONSENT: You entered without consent of the owner, the owner's agent,[2] or the person in lawful possession of the property; AND
  • OCCUPATION WITHOUT CONSENT: You occupied the land or building without consent of the owner, the owner's agent, or the person in lawful possession of the property; AND,
  • REMAINED UNTIL REMOVAL: You remained continuously on some part of the property until you were removed.

Example: Defendant Derek has been banned from Victim Vi's coffee shop. Nonetheless, he enters the shop one morning, hoping to get something to drink. Vi calls police and reports Derek for violating CPC §602(k). But, before police arrive, Vi decides to allow Derek to stay for a drink. When police arrive and find Derek in the shop, should he be arrested?

Conclusion: Derek willfully entered property owned by Vi. He didn't have her permission to do so. He remained there until police arrived to remove him. These are elements of the crime. However, Derek didn't remain inside the shop against Vi's wishes; she changed her mind and allowed Derek to stay. On these facts, police should not arrest Derek.

Penalties For Trespassing Under CPC §602(k)

Misdemeanor Trespassing

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

  • A term of up to one (1) year in a county jail; OR,
  • A fine of up to $1000 (one-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[3]

Trespassing Infraction

Conviction of an infraction[4] under CPC §602(k) may result in:

  • A small fine.

If you commit Trespass, it is possible you'll be charged with an infraction. However, you'll likely be charged with a misdemeanor.[5] The penalty may be one (1) year in a county jail, a fine of up to $1000 (one-thousand dollars), or both a fine and imprisonment.[6]

Defenses Against California Penal Code §602(k) – Trespassing

Four common defenses against a charge of Trespassing under CPC §602(k) are:

You Had The Right To Be On The Property

Example: Defendant Dale has been hired by Apartment Landlord to landscape. But Apartment Landlord has not told all her residents about Dale. When Victim Vonn, one uninformed resident, sees Dale about the complex, she becomes worried and calls police, who arrest Dale under CPC §602(k). Is he guilty?

Conclusion: Apartment Landlord, who would presumably have the right to admit persons to work on the apartment property, has contracted with Dale, whose employment requires entering onto the land to landscape the property. This fact is a sufficient defense to completely acquit Dale. So long as Dale does only what he has been hired to do, Dale is not guilty. He had the right to be on the property.

You Didn't Occupy The Property

Example: In an effort to win a bet, Defendant Damian sprints across a paddock owned by Victim Vickie, a horse trainer. She sees him do this and, fearing for her horses, calls police. Vickie has Damian arrested under §602(k). Damian says he can't be guilty of Trespassing on these facts. Should he be acquitted?   

Conclusion: Actual occupation of the land in question is an element of trespassing. But Damian didn't occupy Vickie's land for longer than was necessary to alarm her by sprinting across it. Since this element of the charge can't be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and since US courts find for the defendant if even one element of a charge isn't proven, Damian should be acquitted. He didn't occupy the property.

You Didn't Obstruct Or Interfere With Activities On The Property

Example: Defendant Dee goes to a party held in Victim Vinnie's backyard. She gets very drunk. Later, she goes inside Vinnie's house and lies down on his couch. Then she passes out. When she wakes up, the police are standing beside her. Vinnie has her arrested for violating §602(k). Should Dee be found guilty?

Conclusion: While Dee wore out her welcome with Vinnie, she didn't enter his home to harm his rights or his property. Nor do the facts suggest that she obstructed or interfered with the party itself. She got drunk, went off on her own, and found a place to pass out. Thus, Dee should be acquitted. She didn't obstruct or interfere with activities on the property.  

You Had Consent To Be On The Property

Example: Defendant Deandra is visiting Sister, but Sister doesn't tell Victim Veronica, Sister's roommate, to expect Deandra before leaving to run errands. Later, when she encounters Deandra, Veronica refuses to listen to Deandra's explanation and calls police. They arrest and charge Deandra under CPC §602(k). Is Deandra guilty on these facts?

Conclusion: Deandra willfully entered property Veronica had the legal right to occupy. She didn't have Veronica's consent to enter, or to be there, and she remained until police arrived. Were these the only facts, Deandra would be guilty. But she was on the property because of another with the legal right to occupy it: Sister, Veronica's roommate. Deandra is not guilty. She had consent to be on the property.

Related Offenses

Note: The crimes below are described generally as “related” because they're frequently charged with CPC §602(k) and/or have common elements the prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

California law includes several offenses related to Trespassing, including: Domestic Battery (CPC §243(e)(1)), Corporal Injury On Spouse, Cohabitant Or Significant Other (CPC §§273.5(a) and (b)), Criminal Threats (CPC §422(a)), Burglary (CPC §459), Grand Theft (CPC §487), Petty Theft (CPC §488), Vandalism (CPC §§ [Sections] 594(a) (1) – (3)) and Stalking (CPC §646.9(a)).

Domestic Battery

California's law forbidding Domestic Battery (CPC §243(e)(1)) applies whenever Battery is committed “against a spouse, a person with whom [you're] cohabiting, a person who is the parent of [your] child, former spouse, fiancé, or fiancée, or a person with whom [you] currently [have], or [ ] previously had, a dating or engagement relationship.”[7]  The crime is related to Trespassing because acts of trespassing often accompany domestic violence, allowing the prosecution to charge you with both in the same trial.

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

  • A term of up to one (1) year in a county jail; OR,
  • A fine of up to $2,000 (two-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment; OR,
  • Probation conditioned on completing a batterer's treatment program or a similar class.[8]

You can always find more information in the Domestic Violence Defense Lawyer section of the Kann California Law Group's website. Feel free to contact the Kann California Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County. Your call always goes directly     to a lawyer. It's guaranteed.

California Criminal Jury Instructions – Domestic Battery

To convict you under CPC §243(e)(1), the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You willfully and unlawfully touched a person in a harmful or offensive manner. The person touched is your spouse (or former spouse), or your cohabitant (or former cohabitant), or your fiancé[e] or a person you were dating, or a person to whom you were engaged, or your child's mother or father. Finally, you didn't act in self-defense or in defense of someone else.

Example: Defendant Dirk gets into a fistfight with Victim Vinton at a party held in Vinton's home. Dirk, who started the fight, is later arrested. He's charged under CPC §243(e)(1) because the fight occurred inside a home. While Vinton insists Dirk is guilty, Dirk says he can't be, on these facts. Is Dirk correct?

Conclusion: Dirk willfully and unlawfully touched Vinton in a way that was both harmful and offensive to Vinton. He started the fight; therefore, he wasn't acting in self-defense, without additional facts. These are elements of the offense. However, the facts do not state that Dirk and Vinton were in a relationship covered by the statute. Thus, while he is responsible for simple Battery, Dirk is correct about the charge.

Corporal Injury On Spouse, Cohabitant, Or Significant Other

 

California's law regarding Corporal Injury On Spouse, Cohabitant Or Significant Other (CPC §§273.5(a) and (b)) applies whenever anyone “willfully inflicts corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition upon a”[9] person listed in the statute, which includes spouses, cohabitants and significant others. The offense is related to Trespassing because the crime of Corporal Injury On A Spouse, Cohabitant, Or Significant Other often occurs during trespassing, which permits the prosecution to charge you with both in the same trial.

Since a violation under CPC §§273.5(a) and (b) can be charged as either a Misdemeanor or a Felony,    depending on the facts of your case, Corporal Injury On A Spouse, Cohabitant, Or Significant Other is a “wobbler”[10] crime in California. If you're convicted of the Felony form of Corporal Injury On Spouse, Cohabitant, Or Significant Other, the penalty may be:

  • A term of up to four (4) years in state prison; OR,
  • A fine of up to $6,000 (six-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[11]

You can always find more information in the Battery section of the Kann California Law Group's website. Feel free to contact the Kann Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County. Your call will always go directly to a lawyer. It is always guaranteed.

California Criminal Jury Instructions – Corporal Injury On A Spouse, Cohabitant, Or Significant Other

To convict you under CPC §§273.5(a) and (b), the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You willfully and unlawfully inflicted a physical injury on your spouse (or former spouse), or on a cohabitant (or former cohabitant), or on the mother or father of your child, or someone to whom you were engaged, or someone you were dating. The injury resulted in a traumatic condition. Finally, you didn't act in self-defense or in defense of someone else.

Example: Defendant Davida's ex-husband is Victim Vick, who suffers from serious depression. Davida and Vick still communicate. She is extremely critical and hostile to him. Eventually, Vick, despondent, takes his own life. A criminal complaint results in Davida's being arrested and charged under §§273.5(a) and (b)(1). She insists that, since she did not intend on harming Vick, she is innocent. Is Davida correct?

Conclusion: Vick willfully inflicted traumatic physical injury on himself. The facts do not suggest that Davida had any hand in producing the result. While she might have abused Vic psychologically, the statute requires corporal injury for violation. Thus, Davida is correct. She did not commit the offense.

 

Criminal Threats

Criminal Threats (CPC §422(a)) occur whenever anyone threatens another person with a crime that would result in death or great bodily injury. The statement must be taken as a threat in its entirety; it must also be written or verbally communicated. The threat must also be made in a clear and immediate way and, finally, it must create a reasonable fear that the other person or that person's family will be hurt. The crime is related to Trespassing because a criminal threat can precede a trespass, permitting the prosecution to charge you with both in the same trial.       

Since you can be charged with a Felony or a Misdemeanor, depending on the unique facts of your case, Criminal Threats is a “wobbler”[12] under California criminal law. If you're convicted of the Felony form, the penalty, without additional enhancement, may be:

  • A term of up to three (3) years in a state prison;[13] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[14]

You can find more information on the Criminal Threats page of the Kann California Law Group's website. Feel free to contact the Kann California Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles County. Your call always goes directly to a lawyer - and that is guaranteed.

California Criminal Jury Instructions – Criminal Threats

To convict you under CPC §422(a), the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You threatened to kill or cause great bodily injury to a person or a member of that person's immediate family. You made the threat orally, in writing, or by electronic communication device. You intended the statement to be taken as a threat and the threat was so clear, immediate, unconditional, and specific that it communicated a serious prospect that the threat would be carried out. The threat caused the person to be in sustained fear and, finally, that person's fear was reasonable under the circumstances.

Example: Defendant Dave hates Victim Verne, his neighbor. One afternoon, Verne is walking past Dave's garage. Dave is working on his car as a song blares over his radio. The song includes the lines, “Him/Just f***ing kill him/I don't care if it hurts.”[15]  Dave glares right at Verne as the line in sung. Verne, horrified, runs home. The next day, still terrified, Verne reports Dave for violating CPC §422(a). Is Dave guilty?

Conclusion: Dave didn't issue a threat; he played a song. The only reason Verne believes he intended the song as a threat is that he looked at Verne – which is hardly “clear” or “immediate,” as required by law. There's not even reason to believe Dave would carry out the threat (if lines from a song can be taken as a threat). That Verne was in sustained fear after seeing Dave is the only present element of the crime. Dave, it follows, is innocent.   

Burglary

Penal Code §459 creates the crime of Burglary, which occurs any time someone enters a building with the intent to commit Theft or a felony inside the structure. You must form the intent commit Burglary at or before the time of entering the structure. The crime is related to Trespassing because burglarizing a structure requires trespassing. 

Burglaries inside homes, vessels, floating homes or trailers are first-degree burglaries. All other forms are in the second degree. This makes Burglary a “wobbler” [16] offense. If you're convicted of Burglary in the first degree, the penalty may be:

  • A term of up to six (6) years in a state prison;[17] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[18]

More information can be found in the California Burglary Defense 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 takes your call. 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 theft or a felony 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: Victim Victor caught Defendant Deane stealing a carton of premium imported cigarettes from Victor's tobacco shop during business hours. The carton was priced at $100. Since Deane admits that he entered the shop to steal the carton, Victor wants to charge him under CPC §459. Should he be allowed to do so under California law?

Conclusion: Deane entered Victor's store to commit an act of theft. These are elements of the crime. But the carton was worth a great deal less than $950. Additionally, Deane took the carton during business hours. Therefore, while Victor should be allowed to charge Deane with a crime (see Petty Theft, below), he shouldn't be permitted to lodge charges under CPC §459.

 Grand Theft

 

California's statute criminalizing Grand Theft (CPC §487) applies, broadly, whenever property is taken with value exceeding $950. The crime also applies to automobile theft and the theft or firearms. Grand Theft does not require the use of fear or force. You must, however, move the property and keep it for some period. The crime is related to Trespassing because theft often occurs during acts of trespassing, permitting, in the same trial, charges alleging both crimes.

Since California punishes Theft in two degrees, the facts surrounding your case will determine the severity of the charge. This makes Grand Theft a “wobbler”[19] crime. If you are convicted of the Felony form of Grand Theft, the penalty may be:

  • A term of up to three (3) years in a state prison;[20] OR,
  • A fine of up to $10,000 (ten-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both imprisonment and a fine.[21]

You can find more information in the California Grand Theft Lawyer section of the Kann California Law Group's website. Feel free to contact the Kann California Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County. Your call will go directly to a lawyer – and that is guaranteed.

California Criminal Jury Instructions – Grand Theft

To convict you under CPC §487,[22] the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You took someone else's automobile, firearm, or property which was worth more than $950. When you took it, you intended on taking it permanently or removing it for long enough that the owner would lose a major portion of its value or enjoyment of it. Finally, you moved and kept it for some amount of time.

Example: Defendant Darnell admits to stealing a working pistol from Victim Vera's pawn shop. However, since he did it during business hours, and since the pistol was priced at $500, Darnell insists he can't be guilty of a charge under CPC §487. Is Darnell correct or should he be convicted?

Conclusion: Section 487 calls it “grand” theft if one steals property worth more than $950 or if one takes an automobile or a firearm. Darnell admits to stealing a working pistol from Vera's shop. Though he took the weapon during business hours, and though it is worth less than $950, Darnell is incorrect. He should be convicted under CPC §487.

Petty Theft

 

California's statute criminalizing Petty Theft (CPC §§488) applies, broadly, whenever property is taken without the owner's permission. The property must be worth $950 or less, nor can it be a firearm or an automobile. Furthermore, Petty Theft does not require the use of fear or force. You must, however, move the property and keep it for some period. The crime is related to Trespassing because property is often stolen during trespass crimes, permitting, in the same trial, charges alleging both offenses.

If you are convicted of Petty Theft, the penalty may be:

  • A term of up to six (6) months in a county jail; OR,
  • A fine of up to $1,000 (one-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[23]

You can find more information in the California Petty Theft Attorney section of the Kann California Law Group's website. Feel free to contact the Kann California Law Group offices in Santa Clarita, Ventura, Encino, Pasadena or Los Angeles/Los Angeles County. Your call goes to a lawyer - guaranteed.

California Criminal Jury Instructions – Petty Theft

To convict you under CPC §488,[24] the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You took property worth less than $950. The property was not a firearm or an automobile. When you took it, you intended on taking it permanently or removing it for long enough that the owner would lose a major portion of its value or enjoyment of it. Finally, you moved and kept it for some amount of time.

Example: Defendant Deedee takes Victim Vincente's $900 iPhone when he's not looking. She intends on keeping it when she takes it. But Deedee only holds it long enough to decide she doesn't want to take his property and returns it. Friend sees her do all of this. She tells Vincente, who has Deedee charged under §488. Deedee defends herself by noting out that she decided not to keep the phone. Is she guilty?

Conclusion: Deedee moved the phone and, ironically, held it just long enough to decide that she did not want to keep the phone. It was property worth less than $950. Finally, at the time she took the phone, Deedee intended on keeping it. These facts establish the elements of the crime. While deciding to return the property should be a factor considered in her punishment, Deedee is guilty of the charge.  

Vandalism

Vandalism (CPC §§ [Sections] 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.”[25] Vandalism often occurs during trespassing, thus making it possible to face charges of committing both crimes in the same trial.

Penal Code §§594(a)(1)-(3) is a “wobbler”[26] 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;[27] OR,
  • A fine of up to $50,000 (fifty-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both a fine and imprisonment.[28]

You can always find more information in the California Vandalism Lawyers 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. That is a guarantee.

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 damage caused by the vandalism was $400 or more for felonies or less than $400 for misdemeanors.

Example: Defendant Dominica, furious with her ex-girlfriend, Victim Vonnie, uses a felt tip marker to draw on Vonnie's car. After washing the obscenities off her vehicle, Vonnie reports Dominica and has her arrested for a misdemeanor violation of CPC §594(a)(1). Dominica says the vandalism cost nothing more than the ten dollars' worth of water Vonnie used to wash off the graffiti. Should she be convicted?

Conclusion: Dominica maliciously defaced Vonnie's car, using a felt tip marker to cover it with graffiti. These are elements of the offense. The only remaining question is the value of the damage for charging purposes. Vonnie had to spend ten dollars on water to clean off her car. This amount – well under $400 – still qualifies for misdemeanor vandalism prosecution. Therefore, Dominica should be convicted.

Stalking

 

California's law against Stalking (CPC §646.9) applies whenever a person follows or harasses another person and makes a threat intending to place that person in fear for his or her safety or the safety of immediate family. The threat must always be credible, malicious, and repeated to be a crime. Stalking law is related to trespass because stalking often involves violating real property rights, permitting the prosecution to charge you with both in the same trial.

If you're convicted of Stalking under §CPC 646.9(a), the punishment may be:

  • A term of one (1) year in a county jail or state prison; OR,
  • A fine of up to $1,000 (one-thousand dollars); OR,
  • Both imprisonment and a fine.[29]

You can always find more information in the Stalking 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. That is a guarantee.

California Criminal Jury Instructions – Stalking

To convict you under CPC §646.9(a), the prosecution must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

You maliciously harassed or repeatedly followed another person. You also made a credible threat intending to place that person in reasonable fear for his or her safety or for the safety of his or her immediate family.

Example: Defendant Danica has an ex-boyfriend, Victim Vic. They have college classes together. Vic, who ended their relationship, feels very uncomfortable every time he sees her. He demands that she stop “following” him. Danica says she isn't following Vic. Eventually, Vic has her arrested for violating CPC §646.9(a). Is Danica guilty under these circumstances?

Conclusion: The facts do not demonstrate that Danica maliciously harassed or followed Vic. She saw him in class. She had no option but to see him, under the circumstances. Furthermore, Danica never made a threat to Vic or to his family. Since none of the elements of the crime is present, Danica is innocent.

 

 

 

 

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

The State of California regards Trespassing as a serious offense. If you're charged with Trespassing, 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, Trespassing, 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] “Someone commits an act willfully when he or she does it willingly or on purpose.” See California Criminal Jury Instructions 2931 (CALCRIM) (2017).

[2] “An agent is a person who is authorized to act for someone else in dealings with third parties.” See above.

[3] See California Penal Code [CPC] §19.

[4] Infractions “[c]arry a fine and no jail time or other restrictions.” See Felonies & Misdemeanors, Kann California Law Group website.  The terms permitting an infraction are described in CPC §602.8 (a).

[5] N.B.: Aggravated Trespass (CPC §601 (a)) is prosecuted as a felony permitting up to three (3) years in a state prison (see California Penal Code [CPC] §1170 (h) (1) [version (Amended (as amended by Stats. 2018, Ch. 1001, Sec. 1) by Stats. 2020, Ch. 29, Sec. 14)]) and/or a fine of up to $2,000 (two-thousand dollars). See CPC §601 (d).

[6] See Endnote 3.

[7] See CPC §243 (e) (1).

[8] See above.

[9] See CPC §273.5 (a).

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

[11] See Endnote 9.

[12] See Endnote 10.

[13] See CPC §18 (a).  

 

[14] See CPC §672.

[15] Song: “Prayer To God.” Artists: Shellac. Track one from the album 1000 Hurts (Touch & Go Records, 2000).

[16] See Endnote 10.

[17] See CPC §461 (a).

[18] See Endnote 14.

[19] See Endnote 10.

[20] See Endnote 13.

[21] See Endnote 14.

[22] Degrees of the offense are described in California Criminal Jury Instructions 1801 (CALCRIM) (2017).

[23] See Endnote 3.

[24] While the jury instructions reference Section 484, the instructions apply to Section 488.

[25] See CPC §594 (e).

[26] See Endnote 10.

[27] See California Penal Code [CPC] §1170 (h) (1) [version (Amended (as amended by Stats. 2018, Ch. 1001, Sec. 1) by Stats. 2020, Ch. 29, Sec. 14)])

[28] See CPC §594 (b) (1).

[29] See CPC §646.9 (a).

Menu