Mo. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 566
Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 566.020 (2026)

Mistake as to age

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  566.020.  Mistake as to age — consent not a defense, when. — 1.  Whenever in this chapter the criminality of conduct depends upon a child being less than fourteen years of age, it is no defense that the defendant believed the child to be older.

  2.  Whenever in this chapter the criminality of conduct depends upon a child being less than seventeen years of age, it is an affirmative defense that the defendant reasonably believed that the child was seventeen years of age or older.

  3.  Consent is not a defense to any offense under this chapter if the alleged victim is less than fourteen years of age.

­­--------

(L. 1977 S.B. 60, A.L. 1994 S.B. 693, A.L. 2006 H.B. 1698, et al., A.L. 2013 H.B. 215, A.L. 2014 S.B. 491)

Effective 1-01-17

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases, 1983–2019 · leading case: State v. Osborn, 318 S.W.3d 703 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Osborn, 318 S.W.3d 703 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 6× “Whenever in this chapter the criminality of conduct depends upon a victim's being incapacitated, no crime is committed if the actor reasonably believed that the victim was not incapacitated and reasonably believed that the victim consented to the act.”
State v. Hall, 321 S.W.3d 453 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 4× “*456 For example, under section 566.020, "[c]onsent is not an affirmative defense to any offense under chapter 566 if the alleged victim is less than twelve years of age.”
State v. Beishir, 646 S.W.2d 74 (Mo. 1983). · cites it 5× “The Criminal Code of Missouri includes § 566.020 dealing with a defendant’s belief as to incapacity or age of a victim of a sexual offense defined in Chapter 566.”
State v. Fanning, 939 S.W.2d 941 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 4× “Another example is the “reasonable belief of age” defense under section 566.020 for certain crimes that, if successful, successfully abrogates criminal liability.”
James Day v. State of Missouri, 495 S.W.3d 773 (Mo. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “]” Thus, by definition, touching a female breast with one’s hand, was not deviate sexual intercourse, as required under section 566.020. 6 . Day was granted leave to file a second amended motion, which was filed on April 24, 2012.”
State v. Yanez, 716 A.2d 759 (R.I. 1998). · cites it 2× “344(1)(b) (1997) (critical age thirteen and five or fifteen-year maximum depending on relative ages); Mo.Rev.Stat. § 566.020 (1994) (critical age thirteen and fiveyear mandatory minimum if child over twelve); Mont.”
State v. Campbell, 356 S.W.3d 774 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 3× “” Campbell’s trial strategy was that he had consensual sex with the victim, but he reasonably believed that she was seventeen years of age or older and this was an “affirmative defense” under Section 566.020 RSMo. Cum Supp. (2007). Subsection 3 of this statute provides that…”
State v. Buck, 724 S.W.2d 574 (Mo. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 3× “Section 566.020, RSMo.1978 provides that in cases where criminality of conduct depends on the victim being incapacitated, no crime is committed if the actor reasonably believed the victim was not incapacitated and reasonably believed the victim did consent.”
State v. Frezzell, 958 S.W.2d 101 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “Section 566.020 provides that “[w]henever in this chapter the criminality of conduct depends upon a child being under the age of seventeen years of age, it is an affirmative defense that the defendant reasonably believed that the child was seventeen years of age or older.”
State v. Nations, 676 S.W.2d 282 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984). “, § 566.020. 8 . This distillation of the child’s testimony is the most favorable to the state.”
State v. Elmore, 723 S.W.2d 418 (Mo. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “2 direct attention to § 566.020, RSMo 1978. Sub-section (3) there states: Whenever in this chapter the criminality of conduct depends upon a child’s being fourteen or fifteen years of age, it is an affirmative defense that the defendant reasonably believed that this child was…”
State v. Hopkins, 873 S.W.2d 911 (Mo. Ct. App. 1994). “The language of § 566.020 precludes its application in § 568.”
Show all 15 citing cases →
Mo. Rev. Stat. § 566.020(2): 1 case
State v. Fanning, 939 S.W.2d 941 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997). “Another example is the “reasonable belief of age” defense under section 566.020 for certain crimes that, if successful, successfully abrogates criminal liability.”
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.