(a)For the purpose of this section, a habitual sexual offender is a person who has been previously convicted of one or more of the offenses specified in subdivision (c) and who is convicted in the present proceeding of one of those offenses.
(b)A habitual sexual offender shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 25 years to life.
(c)This section shall apply to any of the following offenses:
(1)Rape, in violation of paragraph (2) or (6) of subdivision (a) of Section 261.
(2)Rape, in violation of paragraph (1) or (4) of subdivision (a) of former Section
262.
(3)Rape or sexual penetration, in concert, in violation of Section 264.1.
(4)Lewd or lascivious act, in violation of subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 288.
(5)Sexual penetration, in violation of subdivision (a) or (j) of Section 289.
(6)Continuous sexual abuse of a child, in violation of Section 288.5.
(7)Sodomy, in violation of subdivision (c) or (d) of Section 286.
(8)Oral copulation, in violation of subdivision (c) or (d) of Section 287 or of former Section 288a.
(9)Kidnapping, in violation of subdivision (b) of Section 207.
(10)Kidnapping, in violation of former subdivision (d) of Section 208 (kidnapping to commit specified sex offenses).
(11)Kidnapping, in violation of subdivision (b) of Section 209 with the intent to commit a specified sexual offense.
(12)Aggravated sexual assault of a child, in violation of Section 269.
(13)An offense committed in another jurisdiction that includes all of the elements of an offense specified in this subdivision.
(d)Notwithstanding Section 1385 or any other law, the court shall not strike any allegation, admission, or finding of any prior conviction specified in subdivision (c) for a person who is subject to punishment under this section.
(e)Notwithstanding any other law, probation shall not be granted to, nor shall the execution or imposition of sentence be suspended for, a person who is subject to punishment under this section.
(f)This section shall apply only if the defendant’s status as a habitual sexual offender is alleged in the accusatory pleading, and either admitted by the defendant in open court, or found to be true by the trier of fact.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
12
cases (
3 in the last 5 years), 2000–2025 · leading case:
People v. Lopez, 14 Cal. Rptr. 3d 202 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004).
People v. Lopez, 14 Cal. Rptr. 3d 202 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 5× “Defendant admitted a multiple-victim special circumstance for purposes of the one strike law (Pen.”
State of Iowa v. Charles James David Oliver, 812 N.W.2d 636 (Iowa 2012).
“) (mandating life without parole for at least thirty-five years for a third or subsequent conviction); Cal.Penal Code § 667.71 (West, Westlaw through ch.”
Prudholm v. State, 333 S.W.3d 590 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011).
“, Cal.Penal Code § 667.71; N.Y. Penal Law § 70.”
Norris v. Morgan, 622 F.3d 1276 (9th Cir. 2010).
“See California Penal Code § 667.71; C.G.S.A. § 53a-40; O.”
People v. McQueen, 72 Cal. Rptr. 3d 499 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008).
“Defendant contends that (1) the trial court abused its discretion under Evidence Code section 352 by admitting photographic evidence of the crimes; (2) the court failed to instruct sua sponte on duplicate counts; (3) the trial court erred by staying rather than dismissing…”
People v. Lopez, 2004 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5052 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004).
· cites it 5× “Defendant admitted a multiple-victim special circumstance for purposes of the one strike law (Pen.”
People v. Garcia, 165 Cal. App. 4th 1120 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008).
“) (11) Penal Code section 667.71 was amended to eliminate provisions that would preclude imposition of a 25-year-to-life sentence for habitual sexual offenders, and a provision was added to prevent the trial court from striking the enhancement.”
People v. Diaz, 98 Cal. Rptr. 2d 366 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000).
“(Pen.Code, § 667.71, subd. (c).) As explained in Ervin , "[T]here is no apparent reason in law or logic to believe the Legislature intended either law to operate exclusively of the other.”
Robert McCullock v. Marcus Pollard (C.D. Cal. 2021).
“5(a)), with a finding of a prior conviction for willful commission of a lewd and lascivious act on a child under 14 (California Penal Code § 288(a)). He 22 was sentenced as a habitual sexual offender pursuant to California Penal Code § 667.”
(HC) Larue v. Matteson (E.D. Cal. 2023).
“) He claims 15 that under California Penal Code section 667.71 and Boykin v.”
People v. Crisostomo CA3 (Cal. Ct. App. 2025).
“It sentenced defendant to a prison term of 25 years to life pursuant to Penal Code section 667.71. DISCUSSION Generally, evidence of a defendant’s prior acts is not admissible to establish propensity.”
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.