Go Syfert

Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 5-27-603 (2026)

Computer child pornography

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A person commits computer child pornography if the person knowingly:
1. Compiles, enters into, or transmits by means of computer, makes, prints, publishes, or reproduces by other computerized means, knowingly causes or allows to be entered into or transmitted by means of computer or buys, sells, receives, exchanges, or disseminates any notice, statement, or advertisement or any child's name, telephone number, place of residence, physical characteristics, or other descriptive or identifying information for purposes of facilitating, encouraging, offering, or soliciting sexually explicit conduct of or with any child or another individual believed by the person to be a child, or the visual depiction of the conduct; or
2. Utilizes a computer online service, Internet service, or local bulletin board service to seduce, solicit, lure, or entice or attempt to seduce, solicit, lure, or entice a child or another individual believed by the person to be a child, to engage in sexually explicit conduct.
Computer child pornography is a Class B felony.

History. Acts 2001, No. 1496, § 1.

Research References

ALR.

Validity of state statutes and administrative regulations regulating internet communications under commerce clause and First Amendment of federal constitution. 98 A.L.R.5th 167.

Case Notes

Constitutionality.

Court did not agree with defendant's argument that this section was overbroad and unconstitutional on its face and as it applied to defendant and that it criminalized a substantial amount of lawful speech with no compelling state interest in doing so because the defendant's case involved actions rather than ideas. Defendant had conversations over the internet with an individual he thought was a thirteen year old girl, but was actually a police detective. Kelley v. State, 103 Ark. App. 110, 286 S.W.3d 746 (2008).

Age of Child.

In defendant's trial for computer child pornography, under subdivision (a)(2) of this section, and internet stalking of a child, § 5-27-306(a), the state did not fail to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant believed the victim was only thirteen years old as the detective, who was the minor girl at the other end of the computer, told him that she was only thirteen years old in their correspondence and defendant noted the age difference as well as the fact that he would get into trouble if she told anyone about their chats. Kelley v. State, 103 Ark. App. 110, 286 S.W.3d 746 (2008).

Sufficient Evidence.

Substantial evidence supported defendant's conviction for computer child pornography, pursuant to subdivision (a)(2) of this section, because defendant's representations indicated that he believed the person he communicated with online to be a child, and defendant's sexually explicit comments provided sufficient evidence of the requisite state of mind under the statute. Trice v. State, 2010 Ark. App. 6 (2010).

Appellant's conviction for computer child pornography was affirmed where (1) both appellant and the screen name user were forty-six-year-old floor installers, with two sons; (2) the screen name user used appellant's personal computer, located in the bedroom appellant shared with his girlfriend, to communicate with an undercover persona of a thirteen year old girl between January and April 2009; (3) a webcam was found in appellant's bedroom behind some clutter in the computer desk; (4) appellant shared the home with his girlfriend and her minor daughter, and no other male lived with them; and (5) on April 6, 2009, two minutes after the screen name user and the undercover persona of a thirteen year old girl ended their first chat, appellant completed his taxes on the same computer. Fikes v. State, 2010 Ark. App. 803, 378 S.W.3d 302 (2010).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2005–2022 · leading case: Kelley v. State, 286 S.W.3d 746 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kelley v. State, 286 S.W.3d 746 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 4× “Appellant asserts that Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-27-603 is overbroad and unconstitutional on its face and as applied to appellant and that it criminalized a substantial amount of lawful speech with no compelling State interest in doing so.”

United States v. Trung Dang, 907 F.3d 561 (8th Cir. 2018). “Ark. Code Ann. § 5-27-603 (a). Computer exploitation of a child is defined as follows: (a)(1) A person commits computer exploitation of a child in the first degree if the person: (A) Causes or permits a child to engage in sexually explicit conduct; and (B) Knows, has reason to…”

Fuson v. State, 383 S.W.3d 848 (Ark. 2011). · cites it 2× “Ark.Code Ann. § 5-27-603(a)(2) (Repl.2006).”

State v. Brooks, 202 S.W.3d 508 (Ark. 2005). · cites it 2× “Ark. Code Ann. § 5-27-603 (Supp. 2003). This charge was based on the internet chat conversations between Brooks and the North Little Rock Police female officer who pretended to be a fourteen-year-old girl.”

Fountain v. State, 285 S.W.3d 706 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “rsuant to § 5-ll-102(a) when the victim is a minor and the offender is not the parent of the victim; (r) False imprisonment in the first degree and false imprisonment in the second degree, §§ 5-11-103 and 5-11-104, when the victim is a minor and the offender is not the parent of…”

Travis Parks v. State of Arkansas, 2022 Ark. App. 437 (Ark. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 2× “On October 9, 2020, Parks filed a motion to suppress evidence, asserting that he anticipated the State would offer evidence of his communications regarding satanic activities or satanic sex rituals and his profile picture on the social media app MeetMe, which depicted a satanic…”

Sex Offender Assessment Comm. v. Wyatt J. Cochran, 2019 Ark. App. 396 (Ark. Ct. App. 2019). “In 2016, Cochran pleaded guilty to computer child pornography in violation of Arkansas Code Annotated § 5-27-603 (Repl. 2013), was ordered to serve ten years’ probation, and was required to register as a sex offender and comply with registry requirements.”

Fikes v. State, 378 S.W.3d 302 (Ark. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “8 According to Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-27-603(a)(2), 9 a person commits computer child pornography if the person knowingly utilizes a computer online service, internet service, or local bulletin board service to seduce, solicit, lure, or entice or attempt to seduce,…”

— Ark. Code Ann. § 5-27-603(a)(2) — 3 cases

Kelley v. State, 286 S.W.3d 746 (Ark. Ct. App. 2008). “Appellant asserts that Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-27-603 is overbroad and unconstitutional on its face and as applied to appellant and that it criminalized a substantial amount of lawful speech with no compelling State interest in doing so.”

Fuson v. State, 383 S.W.3d 848 (Ark. 2011). “Ark.Code Ann. § 5-27-603(a)(2) (Repl.2006).”

Fikes v. State, 378 S.W.3d 302 (Ark. Ct. App. 2010). “8 According to Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-27-603(a)(2), 9 a person commits computer child pornography if the person knowingly utilizes a computer online service, internet service, or local bulletin board service to seduce, solicit, lure, or entice or attempt to seduce,…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.