California Penal Code §288.4 — Arranging a Meeting With a Minor
PC §288.4 criminalizes arranging a meeting with a minor — motivated by an abnormal sexual interest in children — for lewd purposes. Misdemeanor with up to 1 year jail baseline; felony (2, 3, or 4 years prison) if the defendant actually travels to the meeting. Mandatory PC §290 registration on either.
Reviewed by Daniel S. Rubin, CA Bar 302093 · Los Angeles Criminal Defense Attorney · Arranging a Meeting With a Minor Cases in All LA County Courts
On This Page
Jump to a Section
01 — Quick Facts
PC §288.4 — Arranging a Meeting With a Minor at a Glance
| Fact | Detail |
|---|---|
| Full Name | California Penal Code §288.4 — Arranging Meeting With Minor for Lewd Purpose |
| Code Type | Penal Code (PC) |
| Classification | Wobbler |
| Misdemeanor Penalty | Up to 1 year jail + $5,000 fine |
| Felony Penalty (Actual Travel) | 2, 3, or 4 years state prison |
| Strike | No |
| PC §290 Registration | Mandatory — Tier 2 |
| Federal Overlap | 18 U.S.C. §2422(b) Enticement |
| Free Consultation | (213) 723-2337 — 24/7 |
01 — What Is PC §288.4?
What Is California Penal Code §288.4?
PC §288.4 Reads:
"Every person who, motivated by an unnatural or abnormal sexual interest in children, arranges a meeting with a minor or a person he or she believes to be a minor for the purpose of exposing his or her genitals or pubic or rectal area, having the child expose the same, or engaging in lewd or lascivious behavior, shall be punished..."
— California Penal Code §288.4(a)(1)
PC §288.4 targets adults who use phone, text, chat rooms, social media, or dating apps to arrange in-person meetings with minors (or undercover officers posing as minors) for lewd purposes. It is the primary statute charged in law-enforcement 'sting' operations. A completed meeting — the defendant actually traveling to the arranged location — elevates the misdemeanor baseline to a felony.
PC §288.4 vs. PC §288.3 vs. Federal Enticement
PC §288.3 punishes contact/communication with intent to commit an enumerated sex offense on the minor (2, 3, or 4 years). PC §288.4 punishes arranging a meeting with a lewd-purpose motive but without requiring intent for a specific completed sex offense. Federal 18 U.S.C. §2422(b) covers online enticement with a 10-year mandatory minimum.
PC §288.4 — Arrange Meeting
Arrange in-person meeting for lewd purpose. Misdo (1 yr jail) — felony (2/3/4 yrs) if travels to meeting. §290 registration.
PC §288.3 — Contact With Intent
Contact minor with intent to commit specific §288/§261/§269 offense. 2, 3, or 4 years prison + §290 registration.
Why §288.4 Charges Are Serious
Sting-operation cases dominate this statute. Investigators pose as minors on platforms like MeetMe, Kik, Grindr, and Discord — building weeks of chat logs before an arranged meet. Rubin Law, P.C. has 20+ years of experience litigating entrapment, mistake-of-age, and Fourth-Amendment challenges in exactly these cases.
Official Sources
02 — Elements of the Crime
Elements the Prosecution Must Prove Under PC §288.4
To convict under PC §288.4, the prosecution must prove each element beyond a reasonable doubt.
Arranging a Meeting
The defendant took affirmative steps to schedule an in-person meeting — time, location, or logistics — with the minor.
With a Minor (or Believed Minor)
The intended person was actually under 18, or the defendant believed them to be under 18.
Motivated by Abnormal Sexual Interest in Children
The defendant's motivation was an unnatural or abnormal sexual interest in children — an element unique to this statute.
For a Lewd Purpose
The purpose of the meeting was to expose genitals, have the child expose them, or engage in lewd/lascivious conduct.
03 — Degrees
PC §288.4 — Tiers & Degrees
PC §288.4 escalates from misdemeanor to felony based on whether the defendant actually travels to the arranged meeting.
Subsection (a)(1) — Misdemeanor
Arranging a meeting with the required motive/purpose but not showing up. Up to 1 year in county jail and/or $5,000 fine.
Subsection (a)(2) — Prior Conviction Wobbler
Defendant with prior §290-registerable conviction — wobbler with felony exposure to 16 months, 2, or 3 years prison.
Subsection (b) — Traveling to the Meeting
Defendant actually goes to the arranged meeting location. Straight felony — 2, 3, or 4 years state prison plus mandatory §290 registration.
04 — Penalties
Penalties for PC §288.4 Arranging a Meeting With a Minor in California
PC §288.4 is a wobbler that escalates to a felony when the defendant travels to the meeting.
| Charge | Code | Prison Term | Probation | Strike |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arrange Meeting — No Travel | PC §288.4(a)(1) | Up to 1 year jail + $5,000 fine | Available | No |
| Arrange Meeting — Prior §290 Conviction | PC §288.4(a)(2) | 16 mo, 2, or 3 years prison | Rare | No |
| Arrange Meeting & Travel | PC §288.4(b) | 2, 3, or 4 years state prison | Rare | No |
| Contact With Intent to Commit Sex Offense | PC §288.3 | 2, 3, or 4 years prison | Rare | No |
Companion Charges & Federal Exposure
Federal Online Enticement
18 U.S.C. §2422(b)
Use of interstate commerce (internet/phone) to entice a minor — 10-year mandatory federal minimum, up to life.
Attempted Lewd Acts
PC §664/§288
Charged when the defendant took a substantial step toward the completed §288 act.
Distribution of Harmful Matter to Minor
PC §288.2
Sending explicit images/video to the minor as part of the grooming — up to 3 years prison.
Contact With Intent — §288.3
PC §288.3
Filed alongside §288.4 when the communications show intent to commit an enumerated sex offense.
Prior §290 Registrable
PC §290 / §667.71
Prior sex offense triggers Habitual Sex Offender exposure and can push §288.4 into felony (a)(2) territory.
Collateral Consequences
- Mandatory PC §290 Tier 2 registration (typ. 20 yrs)
- Federal Mann-Act / §2422(b) risk on any interstate communication
- Aggravated felony for immigration (any felony §288.4)
- Residency restrictions (Jessica's Law)
- Employment: teaching, healthcare, DoJ Live Scan disqualifiers
- Loss of firearm rights (felony convictions)
Sentencing References
05 — Defense Strategies
How Rubin Law Defends PC §288.4 Arranging a Meeting With a Minor Charges
Rubin Law, P.C. defends §288.4 sting cases with digital-forensics experts and aggressive suppression motions.
Entrapment
Officers created chat sequences that induced the defendant to arrange something he would not otherwise have initiated. California uses the objective test (People v. Barraza).
People v. Barraza
Mistake of Age
The profile listed the age as 18+, the 'minor' repeatedly confirmed adult age, and no reasonable person would have concluded otherwise.
People v. Hernandez
No Actual Arrangement
The chat logs never crystallized into a concrete meeting — no time, no place, no confirmed plan. Fantasy role-play is not §288.4.
PC §288.4(a)
No Lewd Purpose
The conversations, taken in context, do not show that the meeting itself was for a lewd purpose — sexual chatter alone is insufficient.
PC §288.4(a)
Illegal Search of Devices
PC §1538.5 suppression of phone, tablet, and computer contents seized without a valid warrant or beyond warrant scope (Riley v. California).
Riley v. California
Coerced Statements / Miranda
Post-arrest statements suppressed when detectives failed to Mirandize or used coercive interrogation tactics.
Miranda
Constitutional Sources
07 — Court Process
How PC §288.4 Arranging a Meeting With a Minor Cases Move Through Los Angeles Courts
How a §288.4 sting case moves through LA County courts.
- 1
Step 1 — Sting Arrest at Meeting Location
Task-force officers arrest at the arranged meet. Do NOT unlock your phone, do NOT give consent to search, invoke Miranda immediately.
- 2
Step 2 — Charge Filing
DA reviews chat logs and device forensics; §288.4(a)(1) or (b) filing depends on whether defendant traveled.
- 3
Step 3 — Arraignment
Charges read, plea entered. Bail typically $50,000–$150,000 depending on subsection.
- 4
Step 4 — Preliminary Hearing (Felony)
Attack the 'arrangement,' 'lewd purpose,' and 'motive' elements. Cross-examine the undercover officer.
- 5
Step 5 — Pre-Trial Motions
PC §1538.5 on device search; entrapment motion; motion in limine on prior-acts evidence.
- 6
Step 6 — Trial or Resolution
Jury trial or plea to non-registrable offense (§647.6 attempt, §32 accessory) where evidence permits.
Los Angeles Courts That Handle PC §288.4 Arranging a Meeting With a Minor Cases
Common LA-area courthouses handling PC §288.4 filings.
Reviewed by Your Attorney
Daniel S. Rubin — Los Angeles Arranging a Meeting With a Minor Defense Attorney
Daniel S. Rubin has defended clients charged with arranging a meeting with a minor and related offenses in Los Angeles County courts — including Clara Shortridge Foltz, Van Nuys, Compton, and Pomona. He understands that these cases are won in the details: the suppression hearing that eliminates key evidence, the preliminary hearing cross-examination that exposes a weak witness, the penalty phase argument that keeps a client out of the worst outcome.
This page was written and reviewed by Daniel A. Rubin, Los Angeles criminal defense attorney, CA State Bar 302093, with 10+ years of experience defending clients charged under PC §288.4 in Los Angeles County. Last reviewed: July 2026.
CA Bar 302093 | Whittier Law School | Rising Star — Super Lawyers 2019–2023 | Arranging a Meeting With a Minor Cases Throughout LA County
See our full Arranging a Meeting With a Minor defense practice
09 — FAQs
PC §288.4 Arranging a Meeting With a Minor Questions — Los Angeles
What is the penalty for PC §288.4?
Baseline PC §288.4(a)(1) is a misdemeanor with up to 1 year in county jail and a $5,000 fine. If the defendant actually travels to the arranged meeting, §288.4(b) is a straight felony with 2, 3, or 4 years in state prison. Registration under PC §290 is mandatory on any felony conviction.
Do I have to actually meet the minor?
No. Under §288.4(a)(1), simply arranging the meeting with the required motive and purpose is enough. Actually traveling to the meet elevates the case to felony §288.4(b).
Is entrapment a defense in sting cases?
Yes. California uses the objective test from People v. Barraza — if police conduct would have induced a normally law-abiding person to commit the offense, entrapment applies. Persistent officer pressure, romantic hooks, and manufactured urgency are all key facts.
Does PC §288.4 require sex-offender registration?
Yes on any felony conviction. Registration is Tier 2 (typically 20 years). Misdemeanor §288.4(a)(1) is also a registrable offense under PC §290(c).
What if there was no actual minor — just an undercover officer?
Doesn't matter. The statute reaches conduct with a person the defendant 'believes to be a minor.' Factual impossibility is not a defense to §288.4.
Is mistake of age a defense?
Yes, but the belief must be objectively reasonable. Explicit profile ages, verified in-chat confirmations, and documentary evidence support the defense (People v. Hernandez).
Will federal charges follow?
Possible. Interstate internet communications trigger 18 U.S.C. §2422(b) — online enticement — with a 10-year mandatory minimum. Coordination between state and federal counsel is critical.
Can I get probation for PC §288.4?
Yes on the misdemeanor (a)(1). Probation is rare but available on felony (b) with strong mitigation, treatment enrollment, and negotiated pleas.
Available 24/7 — Free Consultation
Arrested in a PC §288.4 Sting Operation?
Sting cases turn on chat logs, device forensics, and entrapment defenses. Rubin Law, P.C. has 20+ years of experience litigating exactly these charges. Do NOT talk to detectives — call now.