California Codes

Cal. Penal Code § 667.8 (2026)

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

(a)Except as provided in subdivision (b), a person convicted of a felony violation of Section 261, 264.1, 286, 287, or 289 or former Section 262 or 288a who, for the purpose of committing that sexual offense, kidnapped the victim in violation of Section 207 or 209, shall be punished by an additional term of nine years.

(b)A person convicted of a felony violation of subdivision (c) of Section 286, subdivision (c) of Section 287 or former Section 288a, or Section 288 who, for the purpose of committing that sexual offense, kidnapped the victim, who was under 14 years of age at the time of the offense, in violation of Section 207 or 209, shall be punished by an additional term of 15 years. This subdivision does not apply to conduct proscribed by Section 277, 278, or 278.5.

(c)The following shall govern the imposition of an enhancement pursuant to this section:

(1)Only one enhancement shall be imposed for a victim per incident.

(2)If there are two or more victims, one enhancement can be imposed for each victim per incident.

(3)The enhancement may be in addition to the punishment for either, but not both, of the following:

(A)A violation of Section 207 or 209.

(B)A violation of the sexual offenses enumerated in this section.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1986–2021 · leading case: Theo Ervin Williams v. Robert Borg, Warden, 139 F.3d 737 (9th Cir. 1998).
Theo Ervin Williams v. Robert Borg, Warden, 139 F.3d 737 (9th Cir. 1998). · cites it 4× “Penal Code § 209 with Cal.Penal Code § 667.8. Therefore, Williams’ sentence does not violate double jeopardy.”
People v. Magana, 91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3759 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “[2] Penal Code section 667.8, subdivision (a) provides: "Except as provided in subdivision (b), any person convicted of a felony violation of Section 261, 264.”
People v. Norrell, 913 P.2d 458 (Cal. 1996). · cites it 2× “[2] There can be no doubt that the Legislature is aware of its ability to curtail or eliminate trial court sentencing discretion when it determines that it is appropriate to do so.”
People v. Jovan B., 863 P.2d 673 (Cal. 1993). “1, subdivision (a), as applied to juvenile proceedings by paragraph four of Welfare and Institutions Code section 726, provides that the “aggregate term of imprisonment” for multiple offenses may include enhancements, among others, for kidnapping the victim of a sex felony (Pen.…”
People v. Waples, 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3092 (Cal. Ct. App. 2000). “As to the convictions involving victim Ashley, the jury further found that Waples had kidnapped her for the purpose of committing a sexual offense (Pen. Code, § 667.8, subd. (b)), kidnapped her in violation of Penal Code section 207 (Pen.”
People v. Reed, 2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4658 (Cal. Ct. App. 2005). “) At the time of the offense, Penal Code section 667.8 provided for a three-year (now nine-year) enhancement for “[a]ny person convicted of a felony violation of [Penal Code] Section 261, 264.”
Theodore A. Weston v. Peg Kernan, Warden, 50 F.3d 633 (9th Cir. 1995). “5(b)), and kidnapping for the purpose of committing the offense (Cal.Penal Code § 667.8). He was also alleged to have a prior conviction for forcible oral copulation and two prior prison terms (Cal.”
People v. Davis, 191 Cal. App. 3d 1365 (Cal. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “8, subdivision (a) , 1 should be stayed pursuant to Penal Code section 654, because the enhancement is based on the same act of kidnapping for which appellant is being punished on count I under Penal Code section 209.”
People v. Tolbert, 176 Cal. App. 3d 685 (Cal. Ct. App. 1986). “(Pen. Code, § 667.8.) *689 Defendant demurred to the amended information on grounds that (1) the court has no jurisdiction over any of the charged offenses (Pen.”
People v. Steele, 210 Cal. App. 3d 67 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989). “Code, § 207) with an allegation of having kidnapped for purpose of committing a sexual offense (Pen. Code, § 667.8). After four days of deliberations, the jury rendered a verdict of guilty on two counts of rape, two counts of forcible oral copulation, and the single count of…”
(HC) Sigur v. Martinez (E.D. Cal. 2021). “CAL. PENAL CODE § 667.8(B). 6 Rptr. 3d at 474.”
P. v. Son CA4/3 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013). “The complaint further alleged defendant kidnapped the victim to commit the sexual assaults (Pen. Code, § 667.8, subd. (a); all statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise stated), personally used a firearm during each of the offenses (§§ 12022.”
— Cal. Penal Code § 667.8(B) — 1 case
(HC) Sigur v. Martinez (E.D. Cal. 2021). “CAL. PENAL CODE § 667.8(B). 6 Rptr. 3d at 474.”
— Cal. Penal Code § 667.8(a) — 1 case
Theo Ervin Williams v. Robert Borg, Warden, 139 F.3d 737 (9th Cir. 1998). “Penal Code § 209 with Cal.Penal Code § 667.8. Therefore, Williams’ sentence does not violate double jeopardy.”
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.