California Codes

Cal. Penal Code § 311 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

As used in this chapter, the following definitions apply:

(a)“Obscene matter” means matter, taken as a whole, that to the average person, applying contemporary statewide standards, appeals to the prurient interest, that, taken as a whole, depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and that, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

(1)If it appears from the nature of the matter or the circumstances of its dissemination, distribution, or exhibition that it is designed for clearly defined deviant sexual groups, the appeal of the matter shall be judged with reference to its intended recipient group.

(2)In prosecutions under this chapter, if the circumstances of production, presentation, sale, dissemination, distribution, or publicity indicate that matter is being commercially exploited by the defendant for the sake of its prurient appeal, this evidence is probative with respect to the nature of the matter and may justify the conclusion that the matter lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

(3)In determining whether the matter taken as a whole lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value in description or representation of those matters, the fact that the defendant knew that the matter depicts persons under 16 years of age engaged in sexual conduct, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 311.4, is a factor that may be considered in making that determination.

(b)“Artificial intelligence” means an engineered or machine-based system that varies in its level of autonomy and that can, for explicit or implicit objectives, infer from the input it receives how to generate outputs that can influence physical or virtual environments.

(c)“Matter” means any book, magazine, newspaper, or other printed or written material, or any picture, drawing, photograph, motion picture, or other pictorial representation, or any statue or other figure, or any recording, transcription, or mechanical, chemical, or electrical reproduction, or any other article, equipment, machine, or material. “Matter” also means live or recorded telephone messages if transmitted, disseminated, or distributed as part of a commercial transaction.

(d)“Person” means any individual, partnership, firm, association, corporation, limited liability company, or other legal entity.

(e)“Distribute” means transfer possession of, whether with or without consideration.

(f)“Knowingly” means being aware of the character of the matter or live conduct.

(g)“Exhibit” means show.

(h)“Obscene live conduct” means any physical human body activity, whether performed or engaged in alone or with other persons, including, but not limited to, singing, speaking, dancing, acting, simulating, or pantomiming, taken as a whole, that to the average person, applying contemporary statewide standards, appeals to the prurient interest and is conduct that, taken as a whole, depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way and that, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

(1)If it appears from the nature of the conduct or the circumstances of its production, presentation, or exhibition that it is designed for clearly defined deviant sexual groups, the appeal of the conduct shall be judged with reference to its intended recipient group.

(2)In prosecutions under this chapter, if circumstances of production, presentation, advertising, or exhibition indicate that live conduct is being commercially exploited by the defendant for the sake of its prurient appeal, that evidence is probative with respect to the nature of the conduct and may justify the conclusion that the conduct lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

(3)In determining whether the live conduct taken as a whole lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value in description or representation of those matters, the fact that the defendant knew that the live conduct depicts persons under 16 years of age engaged in sexual conduct, as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 311.4, is a factor that may be considered in making that determination.

(i)The Legislature expresses its approval of the holding of People v. Cantrell, 7 Cal. App. 4th 523, that, for the purposes of this chapter, matter that “depicts a person under 18 years of age personally engaging in or personally simulating sexual conduct” is limited to visual works that depict that conduct.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 61 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1951–2024 · leading case: United States v. Mark Davidson, 246 F.3d 1240 (9th Cir. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Mark Davidson, 246 F.3d 1240 (9th Cir. 2001). · cites it 16× “7 At the time that Davidson downloaded images of child pornography onto computer floppy discs, the term “matter” was defined in two separate sections of California Penal Code § 311. Subpara-graph (b) of California Penal Code § 311, which appears under the heading “Definitions,”…”

New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982). · cites it 2× “Cal. Penal Code Ann. § 311(a) (West Supp.”

People Ex Rel. Busch v. Projection Room Theater, 550 P.2d 600 (Cal. 1976). · cites it 4× “Although such conduct also constituted the crime of indecent exposure (Pen. Code, § 311), nevertheless the Weis court held that "[w]here, however, the threatened acts, if committed, in addition to being an indictable offense, will constitute a public nuisance, courts of equity…”

Bloom v. Mun. Court, 545 P.2d 229 (Cal. 1976). · cites it 4× “(2) Plaintiff contends California's statutory definition of obscenity (Pen. Code, § 311) is unconstitutionally vague in light of the recent restatement of the constitutional standard in Miller v.”

Lopez v. Tulare Jt. Union High Sch. Dist., 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3489 (Cal. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 4× “For example, Penal Code section 311, regarding "obscene matter," states: "`Matter' means any book, magazine, newspaper or other printed or written material or any picture, drawing, photograph, motion picture, or other pictorial representation or any statute or other figure, or…”

California Ex Rel. Cooper v. Mitchell Bros.' Santa Ana Theater, 454 U.S. 90 (1982). · cites it 2× “The court found, independently from the jury verdict and based upon its own viewing, that the same 11 films were obscene beyond a reasonable doubt as the term obscene is defined in Cal. Penal Code Ann. § 311(a) (West 1970).”

Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973). “[3] This is not remarkable, for in the area *23 of freedom of speech and press the courts must always remain sensitive to any infringement on genuinely serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific expression.”

People v. Smith, 327 P.2d 636 (Cal. Ct. App. 1958). · cites it 6× “In any pool room or billiard parlor, or in any place where alcoholic liquor is sold or offered for sale to the public;" * * *"" Appellant's contentions cannot be sustained: [1] (1) The ordinance does not violate the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.”

In Re Giannini, 446 P.2d 535 (Cal. 1968). · cites it 2× “184 ; Pen. Code, § 311) and "patent offensiveness" ( Manual Enterprises v.”

Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968). “California ), an attack upon Cal. Pen. Code § 311 (prohibiting, inter alia, the keeping for sale or advertising of "obscene" material), was the first case authoritatively to measure federal and state obscenity statutes against the prohibitions of the First and Fourteenth…”

People v. Arno, 90 Cal. App. 3d 505 (Cal. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 2× “[8] The films "Erotic Hands Parts I and II" (counts VI and VII) contain the act of "fist insertion," the insertion of the fingers, hand, wrist and/or forearm of one individual into the anus of another person.”

Sandquist v. Pitchess, 332 F. Supp. 171 (C.D. Cal. 1971). · cites it 6× “[4] The other, much more common, type of irreparable injury is referred to in the opinions as "bad faith" and "harassment" on the part of the state or local authorities in the enforcement of their criminal statutes.”

Show all 61 citing cases →

— Cal. Penal Code § 311(1) — 1 case

In Re Morehead, 237 P.2d 335 (Cal. Ct. App. 1951).

— Cal. Penal Code § 311(a) — 4 cases

New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982). “Cal. Penal Code Ann. § 311(a) (West Supp.”

California Ex Rel. Cooper v. Mitchell Bros.' Santa Ana Theater, 454 U.S. 90 (1982). “The court found, independently from the jury verdict and based upon its own viewing, that the same 11 films were obscene beyond a reasonable doubt as the term obscene is defined in Cal. Penal Code Ann. § 311(a) (West 1970).”

Red Bluff Drive-In, Inc. v. Vance, 648 F.2d 1020 (5th Cir. 1981).

Harold Wasserman v. The Mun. Court of the Alhambra Jud. Dist., 449 F.2d 787 (9th Cir. 1971).

— Cal. Penal Code § 311(b) — 1 case

United States v. Mark Davidson, 246 F.3d 1240 (9th Cir. 2001). “7 At the time that Davidson downloaded images of child pornography onto computer floppy discs, the term “matter” was defined in two separate sections of California Penal Code § 311. Subpara-graph (b) of California Penal Code § 311, which appears under the heading “Definitions,”…”

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.