CALIFORNIA STATE – A child’s dangerous ride on an electric motorcycle or E-bike can land a California parent in criminal court. And this is already happening.
Prosecutors in Contra Costa and Orange counties have charged parents with child abuse or endangerment after allegedly allowing their children to keep riding illegally, sometimes despite repeated police warnings.
On October 21, the Orange County District Attorney’s Office announced charges against six additional parents. The office said it had filed criminal charges against 12 parents since January over their children’s illegal e-moto riding.
Some defendants face potential prison sentences. The charges are allegations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless proven guilty.
In March, the Contra Costa District Attorney’s Office announced misdemeanor child abuse charges against Benicia residents Steven Leroy Crews and Jeanna Marie Gabellini following a crash in Walnut Creek.
According to prosecutors, the minor crashed a Surron Light Bee e-moto into a minivan at Treat Boulevard and Arkell Road around 3:05 p.m. on September 18, 2025. He suffered severe injuries requiring hospital treatment. The minivan’s driver was uninjured and remained at the scene.
Investigators concluded the teen had been riding unlawfully, at unsafe speeds and in an unsafe manner, the DA’s office said.
Prosecutors alleged the parents allowed him to repeatedly ride the e-moto from ages 14 through 17 while ignoring citations and warnings from law enforcement.
The latest Southern California cases describe similarly serious warning signs.
One mother faces felony child endangerment charges after her 9-year-old son was hit by a pickup while riding an e-moto in Yorba Linda. Prosecutors say the vehicle could exceed 47 mph.
Another father faces misdemeanor charges after an officer allegedly saw his 12-year-old riding a Surron on a public street alongside him, despite an earlier warning that the riding was illegal.
“We don’t want to have to prosecute parents — we want to save kids’ lives,” Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer said in the October 21 announcement.
A separate case announced October 20 followed the death of 13-year-old Benson Nguyen in Garden Grove.
According to the DA’s account of that case, Benson lost control of his e-moto on May 7, struck a raised divider and was thrown into a concrete light pole. Data from his Life360 app showed he was traveling 43 mph.
Prosecutors allege his father bought him a faster, more powerful e-moto despite repeated warnings and earlier injuries, including a broken leg six months before his death.
His father, Vu Thanh Nguyen, faces felony child endangerment and misdemeanor contributing to the delinquency of a minor charges. His mother, Hong Cuc Thi Nguyen, faces misdemeanor child endangerment.
The father faces up to six years in state prison if convicted on all charges; the mother faces up to a year in county jail.
For parents, understanding what they are buying matters.
California distinguishes legal electric bicycles from electric motorcycles. Under California Highway Patrol guidance, an e-bike must have working pedals and a motor that does not exceed 750 watts.
Class 1 bikes provide pedal assistance that cuts off at 20 mph. Class 2 bikes can use a throttle, with motor assistance cutting off at 20 mph. Class 3 bikes provide pedal assistance that cuts off at 28 mph, and riders must be at least 16.
Those are limits on motor assistance, rather than a claim that a bicycle can never roll faster downhill.
The CHP also warns that off-highway electric motorcycles are prohibited on public roads. Obtaining a motorcycle license does not, by itself, make an off-highway vehicle street-legal.
In an April consumer alert, Attorney General Rob Bonta and several Bay Area district attorneys warned that vehicles marketed as e-bikes may actually be motorcycles or mopeds.
Parents should check the vehicle’s classification label, motor power, assisted speed and whether their child can legally ride it. Local governments and school districts can impose additional restrictions.
Criminal responsibility is also case-specific. California’s jury instructions for child endangerment involving indirect conduct require criminal negligence, a substantially higher standard than an ordinary parenting mistake.
The repeated warnings described in these cases help explain prosecutors’ focus: what adults allegedly knew about the danger, and what they continued to permit.
