(a)Any person who without the written permission of the landowner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession of the land, willfully enters any lands under cultivation or enclosed by fence, belonging to, or occupied by, another, or who willfully enters upon uncultivated or unenclosed lands where signs forbidding trespass are displayed at intervals not less than three to the mile along all exterior boundaries and at all roads and trails entering the lands, is guilty of a public offense.
(b)Any person convicted of a violation of subdivision (a) shall be punished as follows:
(1)A first offense is an infraction punishable by a fine of seventy-five dollars ($75).
(2)A second offense on the same land or any contiguous land of the same landowner, without the permission of the landowner, the landowner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession of the land, is an infraction punishable by a fine of two hundred fifty dollars ($250).
(3)A third or subsequent offense on the same land or any contiguous land of the same landowner, without the permission of the landowner, the landowner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession of the land, is a misdemeanor.
(c)Subdivision (a) shall
not apply to any of the following:
(1)Any person engaged in lawful labor union activities which are permitted to be carried out on property by the California Agricultural Labor Relations Act, Part 3.5 (commencing with Section 1140) of Division 2 of the Labor Code, or by the National Labor Relations Act.
(2)Any person on the premises who is engaging in activities protected by the California or United States Constitution.
(3)Any person described in Section 22350 of the Business and Professions Code who is making a lawful service of process.
(4)Any person licensed pursuant to Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 8700) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code who is engaged in the lawful practice of land surveying as authorized by Section 846.5
of the Civil Code.
(d)For any infraction charged pursuant to this section, the defendant shall have the option to forfeit bail in lieu of making a court appearance. Notwithstanding subdivision (e) of Section 853.6, if the offender elects to forfeit bail pursuant to this subdivision, no further proceedings shall be had in the case.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
10
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1998–2022 · leading case:
Veiseh v. Stapp, 247 Cal. Rptr. 3d 868 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2019).
Veiseh v. Stapp, 247 Cal. Rptr. 3d 868 (Cal. Ct. App. 5th 2019).
· cites it 2× “) Penal Code section 602.8, which describes a public offense involving entry onto land under cultivation or enclosed by fence, uses the phrase "the person in lawful possession of the land.”
Edgerly v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco, 495 F.3d 645 (9th Cir. 2007).
“Finally, probable cause could not have existed to place Edgerly under custodial arrest pursuant to California Penal Code section 602.8(a). As an initial matter, it is doubtful that the section applies to residential property, as it prohibits entering, without written permission,…”
Medeiros v. Merced Cnty. Sheriff Deputy Clark, 713 F. Supp. 2d 1043 (E.D. Cal. 2010).
“California Penal Code § 602.8(a) provides: Any person who without the written permission of the landowner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession of the land, wilfully enters any lands under cultivation or enclosed by fence, belonging to, or occupied by, another,…”
Edgerly v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco, 599 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2010).
· cites it 5× “On Edgerly’s § 1983 arrest claim, we hold that the Officers had probable cause to arrest Edgerly for trespass in violation of California Penal Code section 602.8. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the City, and of judgment as a matter of…”
Veiseh v. Stapp (Cal. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 2× “) Penal Code section 602.8, which describes a public offense involving entry onto land under cultivation or enclosed by fence, uses the phrase “the person in lawful possession of the land.”
Perez v. San Diego Cnty. (S.D. Cal. 2021).
· cites it 2× “411 and California Penal Code section 602.8; and violation of State of 5 California Executive Order No.”
(PS) Grissom v. Modesto Police Dep't (E.D. Cal. 2022).
“6 2010) (finding probable cause existed to believe the plaintiff was violating Cal. Pen. Code § 602.8 7 (for trespass, an infraction) and affirming judgment as a matter of law on plaintiff’s § 1983 Fourth 8 Amendment arrest claim); Virginia v.”
Edgerly v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco (9th Cir. 2007).
“Finally, probable cause could not have existed to place Edgerly under custodial arrest pursuant to California Penal Code section 602.8(a). As an initial matter, it is doubtful that the section applies to residential property, as it prohibits enter- ing, without written…”
Cal. Penal Code § 602.8(a): 5 cases
Edgerly v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco, 495 F.3d 645 (9th Cir. 2007).
“Finally, probable cause could not have existed to place Edgerly under custodial arrest pursuant to California Penal Code section 602.8(a). As an initial matter, it is doubtful that the section applies to residential property, as it prohibits entering, without written permission,…”
Medeiros v. Merced Cnty. Sheriff Deputy Clark, 713 F. Supp. 2d 1043 (E.D. Cal. 2010).
“California Penal Code § 602.8(a) provides: Any person who without the written permission of the landowner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession of the land, wilfully enters any lands under cultivation or enclosed by fence, belonging to, or occupied by, another,…”
Edgerly v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco, 599 F.3d 946 (9th Cir. 2010).
“On Edgerly’s § 1983 arrest claim, we hold that the Officers had probable cause to arrest Edgerly for trespass in violation of California Penal Code section 602.8. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment to the City, and of judgment as a matter of…”
Edgerly v. City & Cnty. of San Francisco (9th Cir. 2007).
“Finally, probable cause could not have existed to place Edgerly under custodial arrest pursuant to California Penal Code section 602.8(a). As an initial matter, it is doubtful that the section applies to residential property, as it prohibits enter- ing, without written…”
Cal. Penal Code § 602.8(b): 1 case
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.