California Penal Code section 602 is the general trespassing statute. It covers a wide range of conduct: entering posted property, refusing to leave after being asked, occupying property, and similar acts. Most PC 602 cases are misdemeanors or infractions, and most can be resolved without significant criminal exposure when handled early. This page covers the most-commonly-charged subsections, the notice requirements, and the defense angles.
The most commonly charged PC 602 subsections
PC 602(o): Refusing to leave private property after being asked by the owner or a person in charge. Requires that the property be posted, OR that the defendant be specifically asked to leave by the owner or agent. The refusal must be willful.
PC 602(m): Entering or occupying any property without the consent of the owner. Includes camping, occupying, or remaining without authorization.
PC 602(k): Entering and occupying property without permission. Often charged in squatter or unauthorized-resident scenarios.
PC 602(l): Entering land where signs are posted prohibiting entry, including agricultural, recreational, and similar land uses.
Multiple subsections of PC 602 cover specific contexts: railroads, public schools during off-hours, posted hunting/fishing areas, and others. Each has its own elements and its own notice requirements.
Misdemeanor or infraction
Most PC 602 violations are misdemeanors with up to 6 months in county jail and fines. Certain subsections (PC 602(l) for posted property in specific circumstances) can be charged as infractions, which are non-criminal violations with fines only. Aggravated trespass involving threats of violence (PC 601) carries felony exposure as a wobbler.
Notice requirements
Many PC 602 charges require some form of notice. Posted property must have signs that are clearly visible. The “refusing to leave” subsection requires the defendant to have been actually asked to leave by someone with authority. Notice defects are a common defense angle.
Common trespassing defenses
Lack of willfulness. Most PC 602 subsections require willful conduct. Accidentally entering unmarked property, getting lost, or being mistaken about the property line can defeat the willfulness element.
Authorization, express or implied. Tenant rights (you cannot trespass at your own residence), invitee status, customer status at a business during operating hours, and similar relationships can defeat the unauthorized-entry element. Disputes over the scope of authorization are common.
No posting / no notice. If the property required posted signs and signs were absent, fallen, or insufficient, the case may fail. Photographic evidence at the time of citation is critical.
First Amendment activity. Trespassing charges arising from protest activity, journalism, or expressive conduct can implicate First Amendment defenses, particularly on public or quasi-public property.
Mistake of fact about authority. A genuine but mistaken belief that the defendant had permission to be on the property can defeat the conduct element in some subsections.
Civil compromise. For private-property cases, PC 1377 civil compromise can result in dismissal if the property owner consents and there is no continuing trespass.
The squatter and unauthorized-resident context
PC 602 is sometimes used as a criminal complement to civil eviction or post-foreclosure unlawful detainer. The interaction between criminal trespass and civil tenancy can be complex. A person who entered as a tenant or guest generally cannot be criminally trespassed without first being formally evicted. The line between “civil holdover tenant” and “criminal trespasser” is fact-specific.
What to do right now
If you have been cited or arrested for trespassing, do not give a statement to officers without counsel. Photograph the property at the location of the alleged entry to document the absence (or presence) of posted notice. Preserve any communications showing authority to be on the property. For private-property cases, communicating with the property owner about civil compromise can be a productive defense lever.
Related pages
The Law Office of Zak Fisher is a Los Angeles criminal defense practice. This page is general legal information, not legal advice for any specific matter. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome in your case. No attorney-client relationship is formed without a signed engagement letter. Attorney Advertising. Zak Fisher, Esq., California Bar No. 332712.
Skip to content