Solicitation to Commit Crime Lawyers (PC 653f) in San Diego

Solicitation under PC 653f can mean up to 9 years in state prison, depending on the crime solicited. Our San Diego defense lawyers challenge the prosecution’s evidence and fight for reductions and dismissals. Call 24/7.

A solicitation charge in San Diego changes everything overnight. You may not have committed the underlying crime. You may not have even taken a single step toward carrying it out. But under Penal Code Section 653f, simply asking someone else to commit certain crimes, with the intent that it actually happen, is a standalone criminal offense.

The circumstances that lead to PC 653f charges are rarely black and white. A heated argument where words were spoken in anger. A text message taken out of context. An undercover sting operation where law enforcement pushed the conversation in a direction you never intended. A co-defendant looking to shift blame by claiming you were the one who asked them to do it.

Charges are accusations, not convictions. The prosecution still has to prove every element beyond a reasonable doubt, including the hardest one: that you actually intended for the crime to be committed. That’s a high bar, and it’s where many solicitation cases fall apart.

The fear, the confusion, and the stress of facing charges for something that may never even happened are completely understandable. At David P. Shapiro Criminal Defense Attorneys, we’ve defended clients facing solicitation charges throughout San Diego County, from sting operations to cases built entirely on the word of an informant. As experienced San Diego criminal defense lawyers handling other charges, we know how these cases are constructed, and more importantly, we know how to dismantle them.

The sooner we start, the more options you have. Evidence fades. Witnesses forget. The window for the strongest defense is now.

Quick Reference: PC 653f Solicitation

What Is Solicitation Under California Law?

So what exactly does it mean to “solicit” someone to commit a crime? Well, Penal Code Section 653f makes it illegal to request, encourage, or urge another person to commit certain specified crimes, as long as you do so with the intent that the crime actually be carried out.¹

Now here’s what surprises most people: the solicited crime does not need to be completed. It doesn’t even need to be attempted. The offense of solicitation is complete the moment you make the request with the requisite intent, and the other person receives the communication.

That last part is critical. An uncommunicated solicitation is not a crime under California law. If a letter was intercepted before it reached the intended recipient, or a voicemail was never actually received, the prosecution may not be able to establish a completed offense. The solicitation must actually reach the person you’re alleged to have solicited.

There’s also a crucial distinction between solicitation and simply expressing frustration or anger. Saying “I wish someone would teach him a lesson” is not the same as saying “Will you go hurt him for me?” The law requires a specific request directed at a specific person, coupled with genuine intent. Vague statements, hypotheticals, and expressions of anger do not rise to the level of criminal solicitation, no matter how alarming they may sound on paper.

What Must the Prosecution Prove?

Here’s what the prosecution is up against. To convict you of solicitation under PC 653f, they must prove ALL of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:²

1. You requested, encouraged, or urged another person to commit a specific crime.

The prosecution must show more than a casual conversation or an offhand remark. They need to establish that you made a clear, specific request for another person to commit one of the crimes listed in the statute. Vague or ambiguous statements, conditional language (“if I ever wanted to…”), or abstract discussions about criminal activity generally do not qualify.

2. You had the specific intent that the crime actually be committed.

This is typically where the battle is fought. The prosecution must prove you genuinely wanted the crime to happen. Statements made in jest, out of anger, while intoxicated, or as hyperbole, without any real intention behind them, do not satisfy this element. Proving what was in someone’s mind is inherently difficult, and the prosecution often relies on circumstantial evidence like text messages, recordings, or the testimony of informants and undercover officers.

What does that mean practically? It means context matters enormously. A statement that looks damning in a police report may tell a very different story when the full circumstances are understood.

3. The communication was actually received by the intended recipient.

The solicitation must reach the person you allegedly solicited. An intercepted message, an unsent letter, or a conversation overheard by a third party but never directed at a potential perpetrator may fail to establish this element.

Every element is a question mark for the prosecution and an opportunity for the defense. If they cannot prove any one of these beyond a reasonable doubt, you cannot be convicted.

Understanding the Subdivisions: Not All Solicitation Is Equal

PC 653f is not a single offense. It’s a multi-subdivision statute, and the differences between subdivisions are enormous. The crime you’re accused of soliciting determines everything from your classification to your potential sentence. Let’s walk through each one.

PC 653f(a): Solicitation of Enumerated Felonies

This is the broadest subdivision. It covers solicitation to commit bribery, carjacking, robbery, burglary, grand theft, receiving stolen property, extortion, perjury, subornation of perjury, forgery, kidnapping, arson, or assault with a deadly weapon.³

Classification: Wobbler. The prosecution can file this as either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the facts and your criminal history.

Penalties:

• Misdemeanor: Up to 1 year in county jail
• Felony: 16 months, 2, or 3 years in county jail (served under PC 1170(h) realignment)

Because this is a wobbler, a PC 17(b) motion to reduce the charge to a misdemeanor is available at several stages of the case. This is often a critical part of the defense strategy.

PC 653f(b): Solicitation to Commit Murder

This is the most serious subdivision. Soliciting another person to commit murder carries a state prison sentence of 3, 6, or 9 years.⁴

Classification: Felony (always).

These cases frequently arise from law enforcement sting operations, often initiated by informants or undercover officers. The facts surrounding how the investigation began, who pushed the conversation forward, and whether you would have ever taken this step without law enforcement involvement are all central to the defense.

Solicitation to commit murder may qualify as a serious felony under Penal Code Section 1192.7, subdivision (c), which could make it a strike offense under California’s Three Strikes Law.⁵ The strike implications make aggressive defense in these cases essential.

PC 653f(c): Solicitation of Forcible Sex Crimes

Soliciting another person to commit rape by force, sodomy by force, oral copulation by force, rape in concert (PC 264.1), lewd acts on a child (PC 288), or sexual penetration by force (PC 289) carries a sentence of 2, 3, or 4 years in state prison.⁶

Classification: Felony (always).

PC 653f(d): Solicitation to Commit Terrorizing Acts

Soliciting someone to commit an offense under Penal Code Section 11411, subdivision (a), which involves terrorizing individuals based on their perceived characteristics.

Classification: Wobbler.

Penalties: Same structure as 653f(a): up to 1 year county jail (misdemeanor) or 16 months, 2, or 3 years (felony).

PC 653f(e): Solicitation Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction

Soliciting the manufacture, possession, or detonation of a weapon of mass destruction.

Classification: Felony (always).

Penalties: 4, 6, or 8 years in state prison.

How Solicitation Cases Are Built

Understanding how these cases come together is essential to understanding how they come apart. Solicitation charges don’t arise the way most criminal cases do. There’s often no physical evidence, no crime scene, and no victim in the traditional sense. Instead, these cases are built on words, and the context surrounding those words is everything.

Sting Operations and Informants

Many of the most serious solicitation cases, particularly solicitation to commit murder under 653f(b), begin with a tip from an informant. Sometimes that informant is a friend, family member, or associate who goes to law enforcement. Other times, the informant is someone already facing their own criminal charges who is cooperating with police in exchange for leniency.

What happens next is usually a recorded conversation, often directed and shaped by law enforcement. The informant or undercover officer steers the discussion, asks leading questions, and creates a record that the prosecution will later present as evidence of intent. But here’s the thing: the recording captures a conversation that law enforcement designed. The question is whether your words reflect genuine intent or whether you were led somewhere you never would have gone on your own.

Text Messages and Digital Evidence

In other cases, the prosecution relies on text messages, emails, social media messages, or other digital communications. These can be powerful evidence, but they can also be deeply misleading. Text messages lack tone, context, and nuance. A sarcastic comment can read as a serious request. A message sent in the heat of an argument can look like a calculated plan.

The prosecution must also prove that you were the person who sent the communication. In cases involving shared devices, hacked accounts, or spoofed numbers, identity itself becomes a contested issue.

Witness Testimony

Some solicitation cases are built almost entirely on the testimony of the person who was allegedly solicited. This raises serious credibility questions. Does that person have a motive to lie? Are they a co-defendant trying to shift blame? Are they an ex-spouse or partner with an agenda? The reliability of the witness is often the weakest link in the prosecution’s chain.

Penalties and Consequences

Sentencing Summary

Strike Implications

Whether a solicitation conviction counts as a “strike” under California’s Three Strikes Law depends on the subdivision and the underlying crime solicited.

Solicitation to commit murder under PC 653f(b) may qualify as a serious felony under Penal Code Section 1192.7, subdivision (c), which specifically lists solicitation to commit murder.⁷ If it qualifies as a strike, the consequences extend far beyond this case: a second strike doubles future felony sentences, and a third strike can result in 25 years to life.

For other subdivisions, solicitation itself is generally not listed as a strike offense in PC 667.5(c) or PC 1192.7(c). However, if you have prior strikes on your record, any new felony conviction, including solicitation, triggers enhanced sentencing.

Collateral Consequences

A felony solicitation conviction carries consequences that extend well beyond the courtroom.

Immigration consequences. Solicitation to commit a crime involving moral turpitude can trigger deportation proceedings, denial of naturalization, or inadmissibility. Given San Diego’s proximity to the border and its diverse population, this is a critical consideration for many clients.

Professional licenses. A felony conviction for soliciting crimes like robbery, arson, or kidnapping is a crime of moral turpitude. The State Bar, medical boards, nursing boards, and other licensing agencies can deny, suspend, or revoke professional licenses based on such a conviction.

Firearm rights. Any felony conviction in California results in a lifetime prohibition on possessing firearms.⁸ Even a misdemeanor conviction under 653f(a) may trigger restrictions depending on the circumstances.

Employment and housing. Felony convictions appear on background checks and can disqualify you from employment opportunities and housing applications, particularly when the underlying solicited crime involves violence or dishonesty.

Child custody. A solicitation conviction, particularly one involving violence, can be used against you in family court proceedings.

Wobbler advantage. For charges under subdivisions (a) and (d), a successful PC 17(b) motion to reduce the charge to a misdemeanor can significantly limit these collateral consequences. Keeping a felony off your record, or getting it reduced after the fact, changes the trajectory of your life.

Defense Strategies for Solicitation Charges

Solicitation cases present unique defense opportunities precisely because they’re built on words rather than actions. Here’s how we approach these cases.

No Genuine Intent

This is often the strongest defense. The prosecution must prove you actually intended for the solicited crime to happen. Statements made in anger, frustration, while intoxicated, or as dark humor do not constitute solicitation if there was no genuine intent behind them.

We examine the full context: what was happening in your life at the time, what prompted the statement, what you did (or didn’t do) afterward, and whether any reasonable person would conclude you were serious. A single text message or a snippet of recorded conversation doesn’t tell the whole story. We can, and will, challenge the prosecution’s interpretation of your words if the facts support a position to do so.

Entrapment

California uses the objective test for entrapment: would the police conduct have induced a normally law-abiding person to commit the offense?⁹ This defense is particularly relevant in sting operations where informants or undercover officers initiated the conversation, suggested the crime, provided the means, and pushed past initial reluctance.

If law enforcement manufactured the crime rather than merely providing an opportunity to commit one you were already predisposed to commit, entrapment is a viable and powerful defense.

The Solicitation Was Never Received

If the alleged solicitation never actually reached the intended recipient, the crime is not complete. An intercepted letter, an email caught by a spam filter, a message sent to the wrong number, or a conversation overheard by a third party but never directed at someone who could carry out the crime may all fail to meet this element.

First Amendment Protection

Not every statement that sounds like solicitation is criminal. The First Amendment protects abstract advocacy of illegal conduct, political speech, and hypothetical discussions. Under Brandenburg v. Ohio, speech is only unprotected when it is “directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.”¹⁰ This defense is particularly relevant in cases involving online speech, social media posts, or political contexts.

Vague or Ambiguous Statements

The alleged solicitation must be sufficiently specific to constitute a request to commit a particular crime. Statements like “I wish someone would make him disappear” or “somebody should do something about this” are vague expressions that may not rise to the level of criminal solicitation. We challenge the prosecution’s characterization of ambiguous language and present the alternative, reasonable interpretations.

Misidentification of the Solicitor

In cases built on electronic communications, the prosecution must prove you were the person who actually sent the message. Phones get borrowed. Accounts get hacked. Social media profiles get spoofed. We investigate the digital evidence chain to challenge the assumption that you were behind the communication.

Wobbler Reduction Strategy (PC 17(b))

For charges under subdivisions (a) and (d), arguing for misdemeanor treatment is a critical defense strategy. Factors that favor reduction include no criminal history, the fact that the solicited crime was never attempted, circumstances suggesting low culpability, and your overall character and ties to the community. We can pursue reduction at filing, at the preliminary hearing, or at sentencing.¹¹

Related Charges: Understanding the Differences

Solicitation is one of three “inchoate” offenses in California law, meaning crimes that punish conduct leading up to a completed crime. Understanding the distinctions matters because the prosecution sometimes charges the wrong inchoate offense, or charges multiple inchoate offenses when only one applies.

Here’s the key distinction: solicitation requires only that you asked, with intent. If the other person agreed to do it, the charge could escalate to conspiracy. If steps were actually taken toward completing the crime, attempt or accessory after the fact charges may apply. But solicitation alone requires no agreement, no overt act, and no progress toward completion.

Other charges that frequently appear alongside solicitation include criminal threats (PC 422) when the solicitation involved threats of violence, and gang participation (PC 186.22) when the solicitation was gang-related.

Facing Solicitation Charges in San Diego?

Solicitation cases are built on interpretations of words, recordings, and digital evidence, and those interpretations are often wrong. We’ve defended clients caught in sting operations designed to produce arrests, cases built on the unreliable testimony of cooperating witnesses, and charges arising from statements that were never meant seriously. We know how to challenge the prosecution’s narrative, expose the weaknesses in their evidence, and fight for outcomes that protect what you’ve built.

The bottom line is this: what you said and what you meant are two different things, and the prosecution has to prove the latter beyond a reasonable doubt. That’s where experienced defense makes all the difference.

Every day without representation is a day the prosecution works unopposed. Call us 24/7 for a consultation. We’ll review your case, explain your options, and start building your defense immediately.