Facts
- Francisco Angel Hernandez was charged with statutory rape under California Penal Code § 261(1) based on intercourse with an unmarried female under age 18.
- Hernandez and the complainant had been companions for several months and voluntarily had sexual intercourse on January 3, 1961.
- The complainant was 17 years and 9 months old at the time.
- At a bench trial, Hernandez sought to introduce evidence that he honestly and reasonably believed the complainant was 18 or older.
- The trial court excluded the mistake-of-age evidence and convicted Hernandez (treated as a misdemeanor).
- Hernandez appealed, arguing the excluded evidence was relevant to criminal intent.
Issues
- Whether, in a prosecution for statutory rape under California Penal Code § 261(1), a defendant may present an honest and reasonable mistake of fact as to the complainant’s age as a defense.
- Whether excluding evidence supporting a reasonable, good-faith belief that the complainant was of statutory age constitutes reversible error.
Decision
- The California Supreme Court reversed the conviction.
- The court held that a reasonable, good-faith belief that the complainant was 18 or older is a defense to statutory rape under § 261(1).
- The trial court erred by refusing to admit evidence offered to prove that belief.
- The court overruled prior California decisions denying a mistake-of-age defense, including earlier precedent treating age as strict liability.
Legal Principles
- California Penal Code § 20 requires a union of act and intent (or criminal negligence) for criminal liability.
- California Penal Code § 26(3) provides that an ignorance or mistake of fact that disproves criminal intent negates criminal capacity.
- Absent a clear legislative directive to impose strict liability, criminal statutes are generally construed to require a culpable mental state.
- A reasonable mistake as to the complainant’s age is a mistake of fact, not a mistake of law, and may negate the intent required for statutory rape.
- When a defendant offers evidence that, if believed, would establish a complete defense, excluding it is reversible error.
Conclusion
The court held that statutory rape under California Penal Code § 261(1) permits a defense based on an honest and reasonable mistake of fact regarding the complainant’s age, and it reversed Hernandez’s conviction because the trial court barred evidence supporting that defense.