Cal. Codes » Penal Code / PART 2. OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE / TITLE 7. OF PROCEEDINGS AFTER THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE TRIAL AND BEFORE JUDGMENT / CHAPTER 2. The Trial
California Codes

Cal. Penal Code § 1127f (2026)

The Trial

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In any criminal trial or proceeding in which a child 10 years of age or younger testifies as a witness, upon the request of a party, the court shall instruct the jury, as follows:

In evaluating the testimony of a child you should consider all of the factors surrounding the child’s testimony, including the age of the child and any evidence regarding the child’s level of cognitive development. Although, because of age and level of cognitive development, a child may perform differently as a witness from an adult, that does not mean that a child is any more or less credible a witness than an adult. You should not discount or distrust the testimony of a child solely because he or she is a child.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1992–2020 · leading case: People v. Gilbert, 5 Cal. App. 4th 1372 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Gilbert, 5 Cal. App. 4th 1372 (Cal. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “Penal Code section 1127f provides that “[i]n any criminal trial or proceeding in which a child 10 years of age or younger testifies as a witness, upon the request of a party, the court shall instruct the jury, as follows: [][] In evaluating the testimony of a child you should…”
People v. McCoy, 35 Cal. Rptr. 3d 366 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). “1 Penal Code section 1127f provides: “In any criminal trial or proceeding in which a child 10 years of age or younger testifies as a witness, upon the request of a party, the court shall instruct the jury, as follows: [ft] In evaluating the testimony of a child you should…”
State v. Douglas C., 227 A.3d 532 (Conn. App. Ct. 2020). “3d 315 ; see also Cal. Penal Code § 1127f (West 1986). 8 In her direct examination, C testified that she would have been fifteen years old when the defendant moved to Lisbon in September, 2005.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.