## 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

1. 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.
2. 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.


People v. Hernandez, 61 Cal. 2d 529 (Cal. 1964)