Cal. Codes » Penal Code / PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS
California Codes

Cal. Penal Code § 20 (2026)

Preliminary Provisions

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

In every crime or public offense there must exist a union, or joint operation of act and intent, or criminal negligence.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 93 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1944–2024 · leading case: People v. Beeman, 674 P.2d 1318 (Cal. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Beeman, 674 P.2d 1318 (Cal. 1984). · cites it 4× “(Pen. Code, § 20; People v. Tewksbury, supra, 15 Cal.”
People v. Sanchez, 29 P.3d 209 (Cal. 2001). · cites it 2× “(Pen.Code, § 20 ["In every crime or public offense there must exist a union, or joint operation of act and intent, or criminal negligence"].”
People v. Sargent, 970 P.2d 409 (Cal. 1999). · cites it 4× “[7] The majority in the Court of Appeal evidently believed that felony child abuse could not, or at least should not, be distinguished from its misdemeanor counterpart solely by its context element.”
People v. Watson, 637 P.2d 279 (Cal. 1981). · cites it 2× “(Pen. Code, § 20.) The majority's errors are compounded by the fact that they improperly presume that respondent harbored a conscious disregard for life.”
People v. Conley, 411 P.2d 911 (Cal. 1966). · cites it 4× “[4] It is urged that no instruction on manslaughter need be given when a defense of unconsciousness caused by voluntary intoxication is presented unless the defense is supported by expert *325 testimony regarding diminished capacity.”
People v. Garcia, 23 P.3d 590 (Cal. 2001). · cites it 2× “(Pen.Code, § 20; People v. Vogel (1956) 46 Cal.”
People v. McCoy, 24 P.3d 1210 (Cal. 2001). “(Pen. Code, § 20; see generally 1 Witkin & Epstein, Cal.”
People v. Tassell, 679 P.2d 1 (Cal. 1984). · cites it 2× “) Penal Code section 20 provides, "In every crime .”
People v. Honig, 48 Cal. App. 4th 289 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “) [22] Indeed, if there were no such requirement of knowledge and the mere making of the contracts were sufficient without any knowledge of possessing a financial interest in those contracts, then the crime would be a strict liability offense without any mens rea or criminal…”
People v. Rubalcava, 1 P.3d 52 (Cal. 2000). · cites it 2× “"In every crime," since the very establishment of our polity, there has had to "exist" a "union" or "joint operation" of "act" and "intent" or "criminal negligence.”
People v. Williams, 841 P.2d 961 (Cal. 1992). · cites it 2× “) A defendant's reasonable and honest belief in the complainant's consent, we concluded, negatives the element of intent: if he has a belief of this sort, "it is apparent he does not possess the wrongful intent that is a prerequisite .”
People v. Jorge M., 4 P.3d 297 (Cal. 2000). · cites it 2× “(Pen.Code, § 20; People v. Vogel (1956) 46 Cal.”
Show all 93 citing cases →
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.