In People v. Barker (2004) 34 Cal.4th 345, the court held that it was error to give CALJIC No. 3.30, another " ' "ignorance of the law is no excuse" ' " instruction. (People v. Barker, supra, 34 Cal.4th at p. 360.) CALJIC No. 3.30 stated, " 'in the crimes charged . . . , there must exist a union or joint operation of act or conduct and general criminal intent. General criminal intent does not require an intent to violate the law. When a person intentionally does that which the law declares to be a crime, he is acting with general criminal intent, even though he may not know that his act or conduct is unlawful.' " (Id. at p. 360.) Barker concluded that, as with CALJIC No. 4.36, a jury could interpret CALJIC No. 3.30 to mean that a defendant may be guilty of violating section 290 even if unaware of his or her obligation to register. (Barker, at p. 361; see also People v. Edgar (2002) 104 Cal.App.4th 210, 219.)