CALCRIM No. 1081. Oral Copulation With Minor: Defendant 21 or Older
Judicial Council of California Criminal Jury Instructions (2017 edition)Download PDF
1081.Oral Copulation With Minor: Defendant 21 or Older (Pen.
Code, § 288a(b)(2))
The defendant is charged [in Count ] with engaging in an act of
oral copulation with a person who was under the age of 16 years at a
time after the defendant had reached (his/her) 21st birthday [in
violation of Penal Code section 288a(b)(2)].
To prove that the defendant is guilty of this crime, the People must
1. The defendant participated in an act of oral copulation with
2. The defendant was at least 21 years old at the time of the act;
3. The other person was under the age of 16 years at the time of
Oral copulation is any contact, no matter how slight, between the mouth
of one person and the sexual organ or anus of another person.
Penetration is not required.
[It is not a defense that the other person may have consented to the
[Under the law, a person becomes one year older as soon as the ﬁrst
minute of his or her birthday has begun.]
<Defense: Good Faith Belief 18 or Over>
[The defendant is not guilty of this crime if (he/she) reasonably and
actually believed that the other person was age 18 or older. The People
must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not
reasonably and actually believe that the other person was at least 18
years old. If the People have not met this burden, you must ﬁnd the
defendant not guilty of this crime.]
New January 2006
The court has a sua sponte duty to give an instruction deﬁning the elements of the
Give the bracketed paragraph that begins with “It is not a defense that” on request,
if there is evidence that the minor consented to the act. (See People v. Kemp (1934)
139 Cal.App. 48, 51 [34 P.2d 502].)
Give the bracketed paragraph about calculating age if requested. (Fam. Code,
§ 6500; In re Harris (1993) 5 Cal.4th 813, 849–850 [21 Cal.Rptr.2d 373, 855 P.2d
If there is sufficient evidence that the defendant reasonably and actually believed
that the minor was age 18 or older, the court has a sua sponte duty to instruct on
the defense. (See People v. Hernandez (1964) 61 Cal.2d 529, 535–536 [39
Cal.Rptr. 361, 393 P.2d 673]; People v. Winters (1966) 242 Cal.App.2d 711, 716
[51 Cal.Rptr. 735].)
• Elements. Pen. Code, § 288a(b)(2).
•Oral Copulation Deﬁned. Pen. Code, § 288a(a); People v. Grim (1992) 9
Cal.App.4th 1240, 1242–1243 [11 Cal.Rptr.2d 884] [in context of lewd acts
• Minor’s Consent Not a Defense. See People v. Kemp (1934) 139 Cal.App. 48,
51 [34 P.2d 502] [in context of statutory rape].
2 Witkin & Epstein, California Criminal Law (3d ed. 2000) Sex Offenses and
Crimes Against Decency, §§ 31–33.
6 Millman, Sevilla & Tarlow, California Criminal Defense Practice, Ch. 142,
Crimes Against the Person, § 142.20[c], [b] (Matthew Bender).
Couzens & Bigelow, Sex Crimes: California Law and Procedure §§ 12:16, 12:17
(The Rutter Group).
LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSES
• Attempted Oral Copulation With Minor When Defendant Over 21. Pen. Code,
§§ 664, 288a(b)(2).
• Oral Copulation With Minor Under 18. See People v. Culbertson (1985) 171
Cal.App.3d 508, 516 [217 Cal.Rptr. 347]; People v. Jerome (1984) 160
Cal.App.3d 1087, 1097–1098 [207 Cal.Rptr. 199] [both in context of section
See the Related Issues section under CALCRIM No. 1070, Unlawful Sexual
Intercourse: Defendant 21 or Older.
SEX OFFENSES CALCRIM No. 1081
© Judicial Council of California.