Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

Cal. Penal Code § 602.5

MALICIOUS MISCHIEF

Applied in 4 court decisions — leading case Aguayo v. Amaro (2013)

Most recently applied in Aguayo v. Amaro (January 2013)

Amended by Stats. 2000, Ch. 563, Sec. 1

How often courts cite this section

20082010201320
citing decisions per year

Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.

(a) Every person other than a public officer or employee acting within the course and scope of his or her employment in performance of a duty imposed by law, who enters or remains in any noncommercial dwelling house, apartment, or other residential place without consent of the owner, his or her agent, or the person in lawful possession thereof, is guilty of a misdemeanor.

(b) Every person other than a public officer or an employee acting within the course and scope of his employment in performance of a duty imposed by law, who, without the consent of the owner, his or her agent, or the person in lawful possession thereof, enters or remains in any noncommercial dwelling house, apartment, or other residential place while a resident, or another person authorized to be in the dwelling, is present at any time during the course of the incident is guilty of aggravated trespass punishable by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), or by both that fine and imprisonment.

(c) If the court grants probation, it may order a person convicted of a misdemeanor under subdivision (b) to up to three years of supervised probation. It shall be a condition of probation that the person participate in counseling, as designated by the court.

(d) If a person is convicted of a misdemeanor under subdivision (b), the sentencing court shall also consider issuing an order restraining the defendant from any contact with the victim, that may be valid for up to three years, as determined by the court. In determining the length of the restraining order, the court shall consider, among other factors, the seriousness of the facts before the court, the probability of future violations, and the safety of the victim and his or her immediate family.

(e) Nothing in this section shall preclude prosecution under Section 459 or any other provision of law.

Official source: California Legislative Information. Reproduced from public-domain California statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.