CALCRIM No. 1060. Lewd or Lascivious Act: Dependent Person (Pen. Code, § 288(b)(2) & (c)(2))
Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions (2023 edition)Download PDF
(v) Lewd and Lascivious Act
1060.Lewd or Lascivious Act: Dependent Person (Pen. Code,
§ 288(b)(2) & (c)(2))
The defendant is charged [in Count ] with a lewd or lascivious act
on a dependent person [by force or fear] [in violation of Penal Code
To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must
1. The defendant was a caretaker of a dependent person;
2. The defendant willfully (committed/conspired to commit/aided
and abetted/facilitated) a lewd or lascivious act on a person;
3. The defendant (committed/conspired to commit/aided and
abetted/facilitated) the act with the intent of arousing, appealing
to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or sexual desires of (himself/
herself) or the dependent person(;/.)
<Give element 4 when instructing on force or violence>
4. In (committing/conspiring to commit/aiding and abetting/
facilitating) the act, the defendant used force, violence, duress,
menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury to the
dependent person or someone else.]
Alewd or lascivious act is any touching of a person with the intent to
sexually arouse the perpetrator or the other person. A lewd or lascivious
act includes touching any part of the person’s body, either on the bare
skin or through the clothes the person is wearing. [A lewd or lascivious
act includes causing someone to touch his or her own body or someone
else’s body at the instigation of the perpetrator who has the required
Someone commits an act willfully when he or she does it willingly or on
purpose. It is not required that he or she intend to break the law, hurt
someone else, or gain any advantage.
Acaretaker is an owner, operator, administrator, employee, independent
contractor, agent, or volunteer of a public or private facility, including
(a/an) <insert specific facility from Pen. Code, § 288(f)(1)>,
that provides care for dependent persons or for those aged 65 or older.
Adependent person is someone who has physical or mental impairments
that substantially restrict his or her ability to carry out normal activities
or to protect his or her rights. This definition includes, but is not limited
to, those who have developmental disabilities or whose physical or
mental abilities have been significantly diminished by age.
[Actually arousing, appealing to, or gratifying the lust, passions, or
sexual desires of the perpetrator or dependent person is not required.]
[The force used must be substantially different from or substantially
greater than the force needed to accomplish the lewd and lascivious act
[Duress is a direct or implied threat of force, violence, danger, hardship,
or retribution that causes a reasonable person to do [or submit to]
something that he or she would not do [or submit to] otherwise. When
deciding whether the act was accomplished by duress, consider all the
circumstances, including the age of the dependent person and (his/her)
relationship to the defendant.]
[Retribution is a form of payback or revenge.]
[Menace means a threat, statement, or act showing an intent to injure
[An act is accomplished by fear if the dependent person is actually and
reasonably afraid [or (he/she) is actually but unreasonably afraid and the
defendant knows of (his/her) fear and takes advantage of it].]
[It is not a defense that the dependent person may have consented to the
New January 2006; Revised February 2013, September 2017, March 2022,
The court has a sua sponte duty to give this instruction defining the elements of the
If the defendant is charged in a single count with multiple alleged acts, the court has
asua sponte duty to instruct on unanimity. (People v. Jones (1990) 51 Cal.3d 294,
321-322 [270 Cal.Rptr. 611, 792 P.2d 643].) The court must determine whether it is
appropriate to give the standard unanimity instruction, CALCRIM No. 3500,
Unanimity, or the modified unanimity instruction, CALCRIM No. 3501, Unanimity:
When Generic Testimony of Offense Presented. Review the discussion in the bench
notes to these two instructions and People v. Jones, supra, 51 Cal.3d at pp.
If the defendant is charged with using force or fear in committing the lewd act on a
SEX OFFENSES CALCRIM No. 1060
dependent person, give bracketed element 4 and the bracketed sentence that begins
with “The force must be substantially different.” (See People v. Pitmon (1985) 170
Cal.App.3d 38, 52 [216 Cal.Rptr. 221] [court has sua sponte duty to define “force”
as used in Pen. Code, § 288(b)(1)]; People v. Griffın (2004) 33 Cal.4th 1015,
1018-1019 [16 Cal.Rptr.3d 891, 94 P.3d 1089].) On request, give any of the
relevant bracketed definitions of duress, menace, or fear.
In the paragraph defining “caretaker,” insert applicable caretaker facilities listed in
Penal Code section 288(f)(1), such as a 24-hour health facility, a home health
agency, or a community care or respite care facility, depending on the facts of the
Penal Code section 288(b)(2) or (c)(2) does not apply to a caretaker who is a spouse
of, or who is in an equivalent domestic relationship with, the dependent person.
(Pen. Code, § 288(h).)
Give the bracketed sentence that begins, “Actually arousing, appealing to,” on
request. (People v. McCurdy (1923) 60 Cal.App. 499, 502 [213 P. 59].)
Defenses - Instructional Duty
Give the bracketed paragraph that begins with “It is not a defense that” on request,
if there is evidence that the dependent adult consented to the act. (People v.
Montoya (2021) 68 Cal.App.5th 980, 999 [284 Cal.Rptr.3d 18] [“nothing in the
language of section 288, subdivisions (a) and (c)(2) indicates that lack of consent is
an element of lewd conduct by a caretaker upon a dependent person.”].)
• Elements. Pen. Code, § 288(b)(2) & (c)(2).
• Caretaker Defined. Pen. Code, § 288(f)(1) & (g).
• Dependent Person Defined. Pen. Code, § 288(f)(3).
• Duress Defined. People v. Leal (2004) 33 Cal.4th 999, 1004-1010 [16
Cal.Rptr.3d 869]; People v. Pitmon, supra, 170 Cal.App.3d at p. 50; People v.
Cochran (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 8, 13-14 [126 Cal.Rptr.2d 416].
• Elder Defined. See Pen. Code, § 368(g).
• Menace Defined. See Pen. Code, § 261(c) [in context of rape].
• Actual Arousal Not Required. See People v. McCurdy, supra, 60 Cal.App. at p.
• Any Touching With Intent to Arouse. See People v. Martinez (1995) 11 Cal.4th
434, 444, 452 [45 Cal.Rptr.2d 905, 903 P.2d 1037] [disapproving People v.
Wallace (1992) 11 Cal.App.4th 568, 574-580 [14 Cal.Rptr.2d 67] and its
progeny]; see People v. Diaz (1996) 41 Cal.App.4th 1424, 1427-1428 [49
Cal.Rptr.2d 252] [list of examples].
• Dependent Person Touching Own Body Parts at Defendant’s Instigation. See
People v. Meacham (1984) 152 Cal.App.3d 142, 152-153 [199 Cal.Rptr. 586]
[“constructive” touching; approving Austin instruction]; People v. Austin (1980)
CALCRIM No. 1060 SEX OFFENSES
111 Cal.App.3d 110, 114-115 [168 Cal.Rptr. 401].
• Fear Defined. See People v. Cardenas (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 927, 939-940 [26
Cal.Rptr.2d 567]; People v. Iniguez (1994) 7 Cal.4th 847 [30 Cal.Rptr.2d 258,
872 P.2d 1183] [in context of rape].
• Force Defined. People v. Cicero (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d 465, 474 [204 Cal.Rptr.
582]; People v. Pitmon, supra, 170 Cal.App.3d at p. 52; see also People v.
Griffın, supra, 33 Cal.4th at pp. 1018-1019 [discussing Cicero and Pitmon].
• Lewd Defined. See In re Smith (1972) 7 Cal.3d 362, 365 [102 Cal.Rptr. 335, 497
P.2d 807] [in context of indecent exposure]; see Pryor v. Municipal Court (1979)
25 Cal.3d 238, 256-257, fn. 13 [158 Cal.Rptr. 330, 599 P.2d 636].
• Defendant Need Not Be Victim’s Caretaker. People v. Montoya, supra, 68
Cal.App.5th at p. 1001.
The instruction includes definitions of “force” and “fear” because those terms have
meanings in the context of the crime of lewd acts by force that are technical and
may not be readily apparent to jurors. (People v. Pitmon, supra, 170 Cal.App.3d at
p. 52 [force]; see People v. Cardenas, supra, 21 Cal.App.4th at pp. 939-940 [fear];
People v. Iniguez, supra, 7 Cal.4th at pp. 856-857 [fear in context of rape].) The
Court of Appeal has held that the definition of “force” as used in Penal Code
section 288(b), subsection (1) (lewd acts by force with a minor) is different from the
meaning of “force” as used in other sex offense statutes. (People v. Cicero, supra,
157 Cal.App.3d at p. 474 disapproved on other grounds by People v. Soto (2011) 51
Cal.4th 229, 241-244 [119 Cal.Rptr.3d 775, 245 P.3d 410].) In other sex offense
statutes, such as Penal Code section 261 defining rape, “force” does not have a
technical meaning and there is no requirement to define the term. (People v. Griffın,
supra, 33 Cal.4th at pp. 1018-1019.) In Penal Code section 288(b)(1), on the other
hand, “force” means force “substantially different from or substantially greater than”
the physical force normally inherent in the sexual act. (Id. at p. 1018 [quoting
People v. Cicero, supra, 157 Cal.App.3d at p. 474] [emphasis in Griffın].) The court
is required to instruct sua sponte in this special definition of “force.” (People v.
Pitmon, supra, 170 Cal.App.3d at p. 52; see also People v. Griffın, supra, 33 Cal.4th
at pp. 1026-1028.) It would seem that this definition of “force” would also apply to
the crime of lewd acts with a dependant person, under Penal Code section 288(b),
The court is not required to instruct sua sponte on the definition of “duress” or
“menace” and Penal Code section 288 does not define either term. (People v.
Pitmon, supra, 170 Cal.App.3d at p. 52 [duress].) Optional definitions are provided
for the court to use at its discretion. The definition of “duress” is based on People v.
Leal, supra, 33 Cal.4th at pp. 1004-1010, and People v. Pitmon, supra, 170
Cal.App.3d at p. 50. The definition of “menace” is based on the statutory definition
contained in Penal Code section 261 (rape). (See People v. Cochran, supra, 103
Cal.App.4th at pp. 13-14 [using rape definition in case involving forcible lewd
acts].) In People v. Leal, supra, 33 Cal.4th at p. 1007, the court held that the
SEX OFFENSES CALCRIM No. 1060
statutory definition of “duress” contained in Penal Code sections 261 and former
262 does not apply to the use of that term in any other statute. The court did not
discuss the statutory definition of “menace.” The court should consider the Leal
opinion before giving the definition of “menace.”
LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSES
• Attempted Lewd Act With Dependent Person. Pen. Code, §§ 664, 288(c)(2).
• Attempted Lewd Act by Force With Dependent Person. Pen. Code, §§ 664,
• Simple Battery Not Lesser Included Offense of Lewd Act on Dependent Person
Under the Statutory Elements Test. People v. Chenelle (2016) 4 Cal.App.5th
1255, 1263-1264 [209 Cal.Rptr.3d 371].
If the dependent person has a developmental disability, arguably there is no sua
sponte duty to define “developmental disability” under Welfare and Institutions Code
section 4512(a) or Penal Code section 1370.1(a)(1). The Legislature did not intend
to limit this phrase in other code sections to such technical medical or legal
definitions, although a pinpoint instruction may be requested if it helps the jury in
any particular case. (See People v. Mobley (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 761, 781-783 [85
Cal.Rptr.2d 474] [in context of oral copulation of disabled person].)
2 Witkin & Epstein, California Criminal Law (4th ed. 2012) Sex Offenses and
Crimes Against Decency, §§ 41, 47-55, 178.
6 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 142, Crimes
Against the Person, § 142.21[a][iv], [v], [b]-[d] (Matthew Bender).
Couzens & Bigelow, Sex Crimes: California Law and Procedure §§ 12:18, 12:19
(The Rutter Group).
1061-1069. Reserved for Future Use
CALCRIM No. 1060 SEX OFFENSES