Updated September 2026 | The Bulldog Law | California Sex Crimes Defense

A Romeo and Juliet law is a close-in-age exemption to statutory rape: a rule that consensual sex between two people near the same age is not a crime, or is a lesser crime, even though one of them is under the age of consent. Roughly thirty states have some version. California does not. Here the age of consent is 18, and under Penal Code 261.5 sexual intercourse with anyone under 18 who is not your spouse is unlawful, even between two teenagers. What California has instead is a sliding scale: an age gap of three years or less is always a misdemeanor, a larger gap can be charged as a felony, and an adult 21 or older with a minor under 16 faces the top tier. Registration as a sex offender is not automatic for any of them, and an honest, reasonable mistake about the other person's age is a full defense.

The Bulldog Law's attorneys are asked about the Romeo and Juliet law constantly, usually by a parent whose 18-year-old is dating a high school junior, or by a college freshman who just learned that his girlfriend's mother called the police. The question is almost always framed around a law that exists somewhere else. The answer people need is how California actually handles these situations, which is more nuanced than either the panic or the reassurance they've found online. That is what follows. If charges have already been filed, or an officer has called asking to talk, call us first at (888) 928-1609 or message our team.

What a Romeo and Juliet law is

Statutory rape laws set an age below which a person cannot legally consent to sex, and make sex with anyone under that age a crime regardless of what the younger person wanted. Applied literally, those laws criminalize a 17-year-old and an 18-year-old who have been dating since sophomore year. Legislatures noticed, and starting in the 1990s many states wrote exceptions: if the two people are within a certain number of years of each other, and the younger is above some floor, the older partner commits no crime, or a reduced one, or is exempt from sex offender registration. The name comes from Shakespeare's teenagers, Juliet being thirteen in the play, which is younger than any American state's exemption reaches.

The exemptions vary widely. Texas exempts partners within three years of each other once the younger is at least 14. Florida lets 16 and 17-year-olds consent to partners under 24. Some states set a two-year window, some four; some make the conduct fully legal, some only bar registration. The one thing they share is a formal carve-out written into the statute. That carve-out is what California lacks, and its absence surprises people who grew up under a different rule and moved here.

Why California has no Romeo and Juliet law

California set the age of consent at 18 and never wrote an exception below it. Our attorneys covered the age of consent rules in detail elsewhere; the short version is that Penal Code 261.5 makes it a crime to have sexual intercourse with a person under 18 who is not your spouse, and there is no clause that turns it off for teenagers. Two 16-year-olds violate it. An 18-year-old senior and his 17-year-old girlfriend violate it. The statute does not care whether the relationship is loving, long-standing, or approved by both families.

What the Legislature did instead of an exemption was build the age gap into the penalty. The charge gets more serious as the gap widens, and the smallest gaps are capped at the misdemeanor level. Defense lawyers sometimes call this California's version of a Romeo and Juliet law, and the comparison isn't crazy, but it is not the same thing: an exemption means no crime; a penalty tier means a lesser crime. A conviction under the lowest tier is still a sex offense on a criminal record.

The penalty tiers under Penal Code 261.5

Three things about that table matter more than the numbers. First, the three-year line is measured to the day, and it runs both ways; a 17-year-old who is older than his 15-year-old partner by three years and one week is in the wobbler tier. Second, the wobbler tiers are where a prosecutor's charging discretion and a defense attorney's negotiation decide whether the case is a misdemeanor or a felony, and where a Penal Code 17(b) reduction later becomes possible. Third, the civil penalties are separate from the criminal fine and are sought by the district attorney in a civil action; they surprise families who thought the criminal case was the whole exposure. Our page on the statute itself walks through each subdivision.

Other statutes for other conduct

Penal Code 261.5 covers intercourse. Oral copulation, sodomy, and sexual penetration with a minor are separate crimes under Penal Code 287, 286, and 289, with their own age tiers. Any lewd or sexual touching of a child under 14 is a far more serious offense under Penal Code 288, punishable by up to eight years in prison with mandatory lifetime registration, and it applies no matter how close in age the two are; the mistake-of-age defense does not exist there. And teenagers who exchange nude photos can find themselves under the child pornography statutes, which have no close-in-age exception at all. Our attorneys explain the differences between these charges on our statutory rape vs. rape page.

Sex offender registration: not automatic

The consequence people fear most is the one least likely to happen in a close-in-age case. Statutory rape under Penal Code 261.5 is not on California's list of offenses that require registration. A judge may order registration under Penal Code 290.006, but only after finding on the record that the offense was committed as a result of sexual compulsion or for purposes of sexual gratification, and stating the reasons. If ordered, it is Tier 1 under California's tiered registration system, ten years, with the possibility of petitioning off at the end. In a case involving a teenage relationship with no force, no grooming, and no large age gap, judges rarely impose it, and our attorneys treat keeping it off the table as the central goal of sentencing.

Senate Bill 145, passed in 2020, extended that same judicial discretion to oral copulation, sodomy, and penetration offenses involving minors 14 or older when the defendant is within ten years of the minor's age. Before SB 145, those offenses carried mandatory registration while intercourse did not, a disparity that fell hardest on LGBTQ young adults. The bill was widely misreported at the time; it did not legalize anything. It gave judges the ability to treat a 19-year-old and a 17-year-old the same way regardless of what kind of sex they had.

How these cases actually get charged

California prosecutors have limited resources and, for the most part, no appetite for filing charges against two 16-year-olds. Close-in-age cases reach a courtroom when something pushes them there. A parent who disapproves of the relationship and calls the police. A pregnancy that triggers a mandated report from a doctor or school counselor. A breakup followed by a social media post, or a screenshot that reaches a school administrator. A different investigation that turns up text messages. Once a report is written, the case has momentum, and an officer will usually try to get the older partner to confirm the relationship on a recorded call or in a friendly interview. The single most damaging thing a young adult can do at that stage is explain.

When both people are minors, the matter is handled in juvenile court, where the goal is rehabilitation and the record is sealed later. When one is 18 or older, it is an adult prosecution, and the difference between the misdemeanor tier and the wobbler tier, and between probation and a custody term, is determined by facts a defense attorney can shape: the exact ages, the history of the relationship, the absence of any coercion, and the mitigating picture the court sees at sentencing.

Defenses that work in California

Mistake of age. Since People v. Hernandez in 1964, California has recognized that a defendant who reasonably and in good faith believed the other person was 18 or older is not guilty of statutory rape. The belief has to be objectively reasonable: a fake ID, a dating app that requires users to be 18, a meeting at a college party, the minor's own statements about her age, her appearance, and the company she kept all matter. The defense is unavailable for offenses against children under 14, but for the 16 and 17-year-olds who make up most 261.5 cases, it is often the whole defense, and it is one many out-of-state attorneys don't know California allows.

No intercourse. Penal Code 261.5 requires penetration. Relationships that involved other conduct fall under other statutes, or none, and prosecutors sometimes overcharge on the assumption that a sexual relationship meant intercourse. The evidence, usually text messages and a single interview, frequently does not prove it.

Marriage. Sex with a spouse is excluded from the statute. Minors in California can marry only with a court order and parental consent, so the exception is rare, but it exists.

Unreliable or coerced statements. Many of these cases rest entirely on the older partner's admission. An admission obtained after a pretext call, or in an interview the young person did not understand was custodial, can be suppressed, and without it the case often has the signs of one that will not survive.

Where a case cannot be won outright, the negotiation usually turns on tier and registration: pleading to the misdemeanor subdivision, avoiding a 290.006 finding, and structuring the plea, sometimes as a West plea, so that the record is eligible for dismissal under Penal Code 1203.4 when probation ends.

Immigration and long-term consequences

For a non-citizen, the tier matters twice. In Esquivel-Quintana v. Sessions, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a conviction under Penal Code 261.5(c), the more-than-three-years wobbler, is not sexual abuse of a minor for federal aggravated felony purposes, because the federal definition presumes an age of consent of 16 and California's statute reaches 16 and 17-year-olds. That decision took an automatic deportation trigger off the table for many close-in-age convictions. It did not make them safe: a 261.5(d) conviction, or any conviction involving a minor under 16, can still be an aggravated felony or a crime of moral turpitude, and even the misdemeanor tier can affect discretionary relief. Our immigration attorneys review the specific consequences before any plea in these cases.

On the record side, a 261.5 conviction is eligible for expungement under Penal Code 1203.4 after probation, the wobbler tiers can often be reduced to misdemeanors first, and if no registration was ordered, there is nothing to petition off. The path back to a clean background check is real, which is one more reason the sentencing hearing is where these cases are won or lost.

Frequently asked questions

Does California have a Romeo and Juliet law?

No. California has no close-in-age exemption. The age of consent is 18, and sexual intercourse with anyone under 18 who is not your spouse is unlawful under Penal Code 261.5, even when both people are teenagers. What California has instead is a sliding penalty scale: the closer the ages, the lower the maximum charge, and an age gap of three years or less is always a misdemeanor.

Is it legal for an 18-year-old to date a 17-year-old in California?

Dating, yes. Sex, no. There is no age requirement for a relationship, but sexual intercourse between an 18-year-old and a 17-year-old is statutory rape under Penal Code 261.5(b), a misdemeanor because the age gap is under three years. In practice these cases are filed rarely and almost always after a parent, school, or social media post brings the relationship to police. Rare is not never, and the consequence is a criminal record.

What is the Romeo and Juliet law in other states?

It's a nickname for a close-in-age exemption: a statute saying that consensual sex between two people near the same age is not a crime even if one is under the age of consent. Texas, for example, exempts partners within three years of each other once the younger is at least 14; Florida allows 16 and 17-year-olds to consent to partners under 24. Roughly thirty states have some version. California is not one of them, and a person moving here from one of those states can be caught off guard.

Do you have to register as a sex offender for statutory rape in California?

Not automatically. Penal Code 261.5 is not on the mandatory registration list. A judge can order registration under Penal Code 290.006 if the court finds the offense was committed for sexual gratification, and that order places the person in Tier 1, which is ten years. Judges rarely impose it in close-in-age cases with no aggravating facts, and a defense attorney's job at sentencing is to make sure they don't.

What if I honestly believed she was 18?

That can be a complete defense. Since People v. Hernandez in 1964, California has recognized a reasonable, good-faith mistake about the minor's age as a defense to statutory rape under Penal Code 261.5. The belief has to be reasonable: a fake ID, a college setting, the minor's own statements, and how she presented herself all matter. The defense does not apply to lewd acts with a child under 14 under Penal Code 288, where the law treats age as strict.

Related reading from our attorneys

• What is the age of consent in California?
• Penal Code 261.5: statutory rape
• Statutory rape vs. rape: the difference in California

Accused in a close-in-age case? Talk to us before you talk to police

The Bulldog Law's sex crimes defense attorneys handle statutory rape and related charges across California, from the first phone call from a detective through sentencing, and we build every case around keeping the charge at the misdemeanor tier and registration off the record. Visit our criminal defense page, call (888) 928-1609, or reach us online. Everything you tell us is confidential.