# Califonia penalty for flight from prosecution (need answer fast) **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 29, 2009, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/califonia-penalty-for-flight-from-prosecution-need-answer-fast/512049 "2009-09-29T23:42:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2009, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/califonia-penalty-for-flight-from-prosecution-need-answer-fast/512049/1 "2009-09-29T23:42:27Z")
I posted this question in the Roman Polanski pit thread, but it being the pit, people were having too much fun yelling at each other to answer a factual question. What’s the penalty for flight from prosecution in California? Besides the previous charges (and please, let’s not discuss them, here - I want a GQ answer regarding flight), what can Polanski expect to face because of him skipping the country instead of going to trial? ---
**Author:** ![MLS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/919ad9/32.png) [@MLS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MLS)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/califonia-penalty-for-flight-from-prosecution-need-answer-fast/512049/2 "2009-09-30T01:07:38Z")
Actually, Polanski was already tried and found guilty. He fled imprisonment. I have no idea what extra penalty he may face if extradited. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/califonia-penalty-for-flight-from-prosecution-need-answer-fast/512049/3 "2009-09-30T01:16:44Z")
California [Penal Code](http://law.onecle.com/california/penal/index.html): > [@](#): > > Section 1320: > (a) Every person who is charged with or convicted of the > commission of a misdemeanor who is released from custody on his or > her own recognizance and who in order to evade the process of the > court willfully fails to appear as required, is guilty of a > misdemeanor. It shall be presumed that a defendant who willfully > fails to appear within 14 days of the date assigned for his or her > appearance intended to evade the process of the court. > (b) Every person who is charged with **or convicted** of the > commission of a felony who is released from custody on his or her own > recognizance and who in order to evade the process of the court > willfully fails to appear as required, is guilty of a felony, and > upon conviction shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five > thousand dollars ($5,000) or by imprisonment in the state prison, or > in the county jail for not more than one year, or by both that fine > and imprisonment. It shall be presumed that a defendant who > willfully fails to appear within 14 days of the date assigned for his > or her appearance intended to evade the process of the court. > > Section 1320.5: > Every person who is charged with **or convicted** of the > commission of a felony, who is released from custody on bail, and who > in order to evade the process of the court willfully fails to appear > as required, is guilty of a felony. Upon a conviction under this > section, the person shall be punished by a fine not exceeding ten > thousand dollars ($10,000) or by imprisonment in the state prison, or > in the county jail for not more than one year, or by both the fine > and imprisonment. Willful failure to appear within 14 days of the > date assigned for appearance may be found to have been for the > purpose of evading the process of the court. (boldface mine) I’ll let someone else look up the rest of the code to see if this sentence is to be served concurrently or consecutively, and someone familiar with California law to let us know if this has changed from 1978 to 2009 and if the law in California is that he gets the punishment as things were when he started evading justice or when he finished doing it. ---
**Author:** ![armedmonkey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/d6d6ee/32.png) [@armedmonkey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/armedmonkey)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/califonia-penalty-for-flight-from-prosecution-need-answer-fast/512049/4 "2009-09-30T01:57:16Z")
So the max is a year, then. Thanks. Question asked, question answered. Gotta love this board for that. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [September 30, 2009, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/califonia-penalty-for-flight-from-prosecution-need-answer-fast/512049/5 "2009-09-30T02:41:04Z")
I would think he would be charged under the current law, because this is what’s called a continuing offence. Every day that Mr. Polanski was thumbing his nose at the California criminal courts, he’s committing the offence. As recently as earlier this year, he was given the opportunity to come back to California to argue that the original court proceedings were tainted. He declined. He’s still committing the offence, by contesting extradition in Switzerland. ---
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2009, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/califonia-penalty-for-flight-from-prosecution-need-answer-fast/512049/6 "2009-10-02T18:50:39Z")
I take it there’s no statue of limitations on those things eh? ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2009, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/califonia-penalty-for-flight-from-prosecution-need-answer-fast/512049/7 "2009-10-04T16:52:30Z")
Well, as mentioned by **Northern Piper** , on the potential Section 1320.5 charge until the very day of his arrest he WAS committing the crime of evasion; and on the unlawful sexual conduct case the statute of limitations (whatever it was for that offense at the time of the incident) is _moot_, because the charging and conviction (via guilty plea) _HAS_ happened, he just has avoided getting and completing a sentence for it. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2009, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/califonia-penalty-for-flight-from-prosecution-need-answer-fast/512049/8 "2009-10-05T03:06:45Z")
Just remembered something - even if Switzerland agrees to extradite Mr. Polanski, he likely can’t be charged or tried with fleeing the jurisdiction, because of the “rule of specialty.” This is a principle of extradition law - if a country agrees to extradite an individual, it’s normally only for the offence alleged by the requesting state. The requesting state can’t tack on new offences once the target of the extradition arrives in that state. Here’s a brief quote from the [US Attorneys’ practice manual on extradition](http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/15mcrm.htm): > [@](#): > > Every extradition treaty limits extradition to certain offenses. As a corollary, all extradition treaties restrict prosecution or punishment of the fugitive to the offense for which extradition was granted unless (1) the offense was committed after the fugitive’s extradition or (2) the fugitive remains in the jurisdiction after expiration of a “reasonable time” (generally specified in the extradition treaty itself) following completion of his punishment. This limitation is referred to as the Rule of Specialty. Prosecutors who wish to proceed against an extradited person on charges other than those for which extradition was granted must contact the Office of International Affairs (OIA) for guidance regarding the availability of a waiver of the Rule by the sending State. ---
**Author:** ![anson2995](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/c77e96/32.png) [@anson2995](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anson2995)\ **Post date:** [October 5, 2009, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/califonia-penalty-for-flight-from-prosecution-need-answer-fast/512049/9 "2009-10-05T16:00:54Z")
> [@Markxxx](#): > > I take it there’s no statue of limitations on those things eh? It wouldn’t make much sense, would it? To erase your sentence simply because you ran away?