California Penal Code 135 makes it a misdemeanor to willfully destroy, erase, or hide evidence you know is about to be produced in a trial, inquiry, or other legal proceeding. A conviction carries up to six months in county jail, a fine of up to $1,000, or both. The statute is narrower than most people assume: it only reaches conduct where you already knew, at the moment you acted, that the item was headed into a proceeding.1California Legislative Information. California Code PEN 135
What the Prosecution Has to Prove
To convict you under PC 135, prosecutors have to establish three separate elements. If any one of them is missing, the charge fails.
First, you destroyed, erased, or concealed an item. Second, you knew at the time that the item was about to be produced in a trial, investigation, or other proceeding authorized by law. Third, you acted with the specific intent to keep that item or its contents out of the proceeding.1California Legislative Information. California Code PEN 135
The knowledge element is where most PC 135 cases are won or lost. Suspicion is not knowledge. Worry about the possibility of a future proceeding is not knowledge. You have to have actually known that the item was about to be used as evidence. Someone who shreds old financial records during a routine cleanup, and only later finds out those records mattered to an investigation, has not committed a PC 135 offense, because the required knowledge wasn’t there when the shredding happened.
The proceeding itself can be criminal, civil, or administrative. A workers’ compensation hearing, a regulatory inquiry, and a felony prosecution all count. What matters is that the proceeding is authorized by law and that you knew the evidence was going there.
What Counts as Evidence Under PC 135
The statute is written to cover a wide field. It specifically names books, papers, records, written documents, digital images, and video recordings, and then adds the catch-all phrase “or other matter or thing.”1California Legislative Information. California Code PEN 135 That final phrase pulls in physical objects like clothing, tools, and biological samples, along with electronic material like text messages, emails, financial records, and social media content.
The item does not have to be central to the case. Peripheral records and secondary copies of key documents fall within the statute, so long as the other elements are met. Destroying your own documents to keep them out of a proceeding is still covered by the catch-all language, even though the statute uses the phrase “owned by another” in connection with some of the digital categories.
Penalties and Collateral Consequences
PC 135 is always a misdemeanor. It cannot be charged as a felony, no matter the circumstances. Because the statute itself doesn’t set a sentence, the default misdemeanor penalties under Penal Code 19 apply: up to six months in county jail, a fine of up to $1,000, or both.2California Legislative Information. California Code PEN 19
In practice, judges often impose informal probation instead of jail time, especially for first offenses. Probation conditions can include community service, restitution, and ongoing cooperation with any related court proceedings. Prosecutors also frequently pair PC 135 with a more serious underlying charge. If the evidence relates to a murder investigation, the tampering count becomes an aggravator in the larger case rather than the focus of it.
The quieter consequences often matter more than the sentence. A conviction for a dishonesty-related offense can jeopardize professional licenses in fields like law, medicine, accounting, and real estate. Employers running background checks see a crime that signals willingness to deceive the legal system. For non-citizens, a conviction involving dishonesty or obstruction can trigger immigration consequences, including inadmissibility and deportation proceedings.
Defenses That Work
Because PC 135 requires both specific knowledge and specific intent, the strongest defenses go straight at those mental-state elements.
- You didn’t know the item was evidence. If you were unaware that a legal proceeding existed, or didn’t know the item was connected to one, the knowledge element fails. Deleting old text messages during a routine phone cleanup, without knowing they related to a pending case, is a common example.
- You didn’t intend to obstruct. Even if you knew the item mattered, the prosecution must prove you destroyed or hid it specifically to keep it out of the proceeding. Accidental damage, or moving something for safekeeping, doesn’t satisfy that element.
- No proceeding was imminent. The statute requires that the evidence was “about to be produced” in a proceeding. If no trial, investigation, or inquiry was underway or reasonably imminent when you acted, PC 135 doesn’t reach your conduct.1California Legislative Information. California Code PEN 135
- The item wasn’t actually evidence. If the destroyed item had no genuine connection to any proceeding, there is no violation to prosecute.
- The case rests on an illegal search. If law enforcement discovered the alleged destruction through an unconstitutional search, the evidence supporting the charge itself may be suppressed.
The knowledge defense is especially useful because it forces the prosecution to show more than suspicious timing. They need actual proof that you understood the item’s significance to a proceeding at the moment you destroyed it.
When the Charge Becomes a Federal Case Instead
If the evidence relates to a federal investigation or a federal proceeding, PC 135 steps aside and 18 U.S.C. ยง 1519 takes over. The federal statute is broader and much harsher. It covers destroying, altering, concealing, or falsifying any record or tangible object with intent to obstruct a federal matter, and it carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison.3Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 18 USC 1519 – Destruction, Alteration, or Falsification of Records in Federal Investigations and Bankruptcy
Two differences make the federal version especially dangerous. Section 1519 does not require that any proceeding be imminent; destroying records “in contemplation of” a potential federal matter is enough. And the penalty gap is enormous. Six months in county jail versus up to 20 years in federal prison. If the conduct touches both state and federal matters, the federal charge is the one that will drive the outcome.
Civil Exposure for the Same Conduct
Destroying evidence can also detonate a civil case, independent of any criminal charge. California courts treat evidence destruction as a misuse of the discovery process and can impose monetary sanctions, evidentiary sanctions that exclude certain proof, issue sanctions that treat disputed facts as established against the destroying party, or terminating sanctions that dismiss the case or enter a default judgment.
A court can also give jurors an adverse inference instruction, telling them they may assume the destroyed evidence was unfavorable to the party who destroyed it. That instruction alone can decide a case. California courts have held that civil sanctions for evidence destruction do not require proof of bad intent; negligent destruction of evidence you had a duty to preserve can still support sanctions. The same act can therefore expose you to both PC 135 prosecution and separate civil sanctions in a related lawsuit, running on independent tracks.
Clearing a Conviction Off Your Record
A PC 135 misdemeanor conviction is eligible for expungement under Penal Code 1203.4. You qualify if you’ve completed probation in full or been discharged early, you are not currently serving a sentence or on probation, and you are not facing charges for another offense. If those conditions are met, you can petition the court to withdraw your plea, enter a not-guilty plea, and have the case dismissed.4California Legislative Information. California Code PEN 1203.4
A granted expungement releases you from most penalties and disabilities attached to the conviction, which helps on employment and licensing applications. It does not erase the conviction entirely. It will still appear on certain background checks, and you may still have to disclose it when applying for law enforcement positions or specific professional licenses. An unpaid restitution order cannot be used as grounds to deny the petition.4California Legislative Information. California Code PEN 1203.4