California Penal Code section 594 covers vandalism: maliciously defacing with graffiti or other inscribed material, maliciously damaging, or maliciously destroying real or personal property not belonging to the defendant. Vandalism cases range from minor graffiti to substantial property destruction, and the classification (misdemeanor vs felony) turns on the dollar value of the damage. This page covers the elements, the value thresholds, and the defense angles.
Elements of vandalism under PC 594
The prosecution must prove: (1) the defendant defaced, damaged, or destroyed property; (2) the property belonged to someone other than the defendant (or co-owned and the defendant did not have the co-owner’s consent to damage); AND (3) the defendant acted maliciously, meaning with intent to do a wrongful act or with reckless disregard for the consequences.
Damage thresholds
The dollar value of the damage determines the classification. Damage of $400 or more is a wobbler that can be charged as felony or misdemeanor. Damage less than $400 is a misdemeanor. Damage less than $250 in some scenarios can be charged as an infraction under PC 594(b)(2)(A). Aggregation across multiple acts can be charged in some circumstances if they constitute a single scheme.
Misdemeanor exposure
Misdemeanor vandalism is punishable by up to one year in county jail (under $400) or 6 months for damage under $250. Fines can reach $1,000 for damage under $400 and $10,000 for damage between $400 and $10,000. Restitution is mandatory. Community service is common.
Felony exposure
Felony vandalism (damage of $400 or more) is punishable by 16 months, 2 years, or 3 years under PC 1170(h). For damage exceeding $10,000, $1,000,000, or specific gang-related conduct, enhancements apply.
Civil compromise under PC 1377-1379
Civil compromise is a powerful tool in many vandalism cases. PC 1377 allows misdemeanor cases involving private property to be dismissed if the victim is fully compensated and consents to the dismissal. Vandalism cases involving private property where the victim is willing to be made whole often resolve through civil compromise, which results in dismissal without a conviction. Vandalism of public property generally cannot be civilly compromised.
Common vandalism defenses
Lack of malice. The malicious intent element can be defeated when damage was accidental, the result of mistake, or otherwise unintentional. Recklessness still qualifies but requires more than negligence.
Authorization or co-ownership. Damage to property the defendant owned (or co-owned with consent) is not vandalism. Disputes between spouses, business partners, or roommates often involve authorization questions.
Identification challenges. Graffiti cases often rely on surveillance video, witness identification, or style/handwriting analysis. Each has limitations.
Mistaken identity. Group settings often produce charges against the wrong individual. Witness misidentification is common.
Value disputes. The $400 threshold is the wobbler line. Inflated damage estimates, repair vs. replacement disputes, and pre-existing damage can support a misdemeanor framing.
What to do right now
If you have been arrested or contacted for a vandalism investigation, do not give a statement to officers. Preserve any photographic evidence showing the pre-existing condition of the property, your location at the time of the alleged conduct, and any communications with the property owner. For private-property cases, restitution and civil compromise discussion can be productive defense levers.
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