Over the past year, a growing number of California parents have found themselves facing criminal charges after their children were injured — or injured someone else — while riding an e-bike or e-motorcycle. The Orange County District Attorney's office has confirmed more than two dozen open investigations targeting parents, with several cases already resulting in filed charges.
For most parents, the idea that buying your child a bike could lead to a felony charge sounds absurd. But under California's child endangerment statute, prosecutors don't need to prove you intended harm — only that you placed your child in a situation where harm was a reasonably foreseeable risk. That's a much lower bar than most parents realize, and it's why these cases are worth understanding before you're the one being investigated.
What California's Child Endangerment Law Actually Says
California Penal Code Section 273a makes it a crime for anyone who has care or custody of a child to willfully permit that child to be placed in a situation where their person or health is endangered. The statute doesn't require proof that a parent wanted their child to get hurt — only that they knowingly created or allowed a dangerous situation to continue.
In the e-bike context, prosecutors have argued this standard is met when a parent purchases a vehicle they know exceeds legal power or speed limits for a minor, or when a parent helps modify a bike to make it faster — for example, removing speed limiters or upgrading motors — knowing the modification makes the vehicle more dangerous and less legal.
The charge can be filed as a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the circumstances, particularly whether the child was seriously injured or whether someone else was hurt as a result of the child's riding.
Why Orange County Is Leading This Enforcement Push
Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer's office launched a dedicated unit specifically focused on e-bike and e-motorcycle cases involving children, and it has already brought charges against several parents. One case involves a mother whose 14-year-old son was allegedly involved in an e-motorcycle collision that killed an elderly pedestrian. Another involves a Yorba Linda father accused of buying his 12-year-old son an e-motorcycle and helping him illegally modify it, after the boy ran a red light and was struck by a car.
These cases reflect a broader trend playing out across the country. New York City's mayor has sent cease-and-desist notices to major retailers selling non-compliant e-bikes after a 17-year-old's death. New Jersey and Illinois have passed new statewide regulations. But California's approach — targeting parents criminally rather than simply regulating retailers — is notably more aggressive, and it's a strategy other counties may adopt if OC's prosecutions succeed.
What Prosecutors Have to Prove
A child endangerment charge tied to an e-bike or e-motorcycle typically requires the prosecution to establish several things: that the parent had care or custody of the child, that the parent knew or reasonably should have known the vehicle posed a danger given its speed, power, or legal status, and that the parent's action or inaction directly contributed to that danger.
This is where many of these cases become far more complicated than they first appear. A parent who purchased what a retailer marketed and sold as a legal, low-speed e-bike — only to later learn from investigators that the vehicle actually exceeded legal wattage or speed thresholds — has a fundamentally different level of culpability than a parent who knowingly bypassed safety limiters. The specifics of what a parent knew, when they knew it, and what representations were made to them at the point of sale can make or break a case.
A Defense Attorney's Perspective on These Prosecutions
Family First Attorneys' Mitchell Krems has represented a parent facing charges tied to this exact enforcement wave and was quoted in national reporting on the issue, calling the charges against his client "absurd" and arguing his client was being made a "scapegoat" for a much larger regulatory failure involving how these vehicles are marketed and sold.
That case remains pending, and the presumption of innocence applies until any matter is resolved in court. But the broader point Krems raises reflects a real tension in how these cases are being prosecuted: much of the confusion driving these accidents stems from vehicles being marketed as "e-bikes" when they more closely resemble electric motorcycles, with parents given little clear guidance from retailers, manufacturers, or the state about what's actually legal for their child to ride.
What This Means for Parents Right Now
If your child owns or rides an e-bike, e-scooter, or similar electric vehicle in California, it's worth understanding exactly what you're dealing with — not what the retailer called it. California law draws sharp distinctions between low-speed, pedal-assist e-bikes and higher-powered vehicles that legally function as motorcycles, and those distinctions carry real legal consequences for both the rider and the parent who provided the vehicle.
If your child has already been in an accident, or if you've been contacted by law enforcement or a district attorney's office regarding your child's e-bike or e-motorcycle, do not answer questions about the vehicle's purchase, modification, or your knowledge of its capabilities without speaking to an attorney first. What you say in that first conversation can significantly shape whether charges are filed at all.