Indiana Code
Ind. Code § 35-49-3-1 (2026)
Sale, distribution, or exhibition of obscene matter
✓ current as of May 2026
Sec. 1. A person who knowingly or intentionally:
(1) sends or brings into Indiana obscene matter for sale or distribution; or
(2) offers to distribute, distributes, or exhibits to another person obscene matter;
commits a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Level 6 felony if the obscene matter depicts or describes sexual conduct involving any person who is or appears to be under eighteen (18) years of age.
As added by P.L.311-1983, SEC.33. Amended by P.L.214-2013, SEC.41; P.L.158-2013, SEC.646; P.L.168-2014, SEC.106.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases, 1986–2017 · leading case: Fort Wayne Books, Inc. v. Indiana, 489 U.S. 46 (1989).
Fort Wayne Books, Inc. v. Indiana, 489 U.S. 46 (1989). “87-614, an investigation of adult bookstores in Howard County, Indiana, led prosecutors there, in April 1985, to charge petitioner Sappenfield with six counts of distribution of obscene matter, in violation of Ind. Code § 35-49-3-1 (1988). In addition, employing the 1984…”
4447 CORP. v. Goldsmith, 504 N.E.2d 559 (Ind. 1987). “311, recodified as Ind. Code § 35-49-3-1 ). At the same time Goldsmith filed a Verified Petition for Seizure of Property Subject to Forfeiture.”
Adams v. State, 804 N.E.2d 1169 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004). “Ind.Code § 35-49-3-1. 2 . I1.C. § 35-49-3-1.”
Lewis v. State, 726 N.E.2d 836 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000). “CODE § 35-49-3-1 (1993). A matter or performance is obscene if: (1) the average person, applying contemporary community standards, finds that the dominant theme of the matter or performance, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest in sex; (2) the matter or performance…”
Van Sant v. State, 523 N.E.2d 229 (Ind. Ct. App. 1988). “Ind.Code § 35-49-3-1 provides in full, as follows: "Importation or distribution of obscene matter.”
Fordyce v. State, 569 N.E.2d 357 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991). “NOTES [1] Ind. Code 35-49-3-1(2) (1988). [2] Pope v.”
State v. Virtue, 658 N.E.2d 605 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995). “Thereafter, on September 30, 1998, a Clinton County Grand Jury returned an indictment charging Virtue with distribution of obscene matter pursuant to I.C. § 35-49-3-1 (Distribution Statute) which provides: "A person who knowingly or intentionally .”
Walters v. State, 495 N.E.2d 734 (Ind. 1986). “…§ 35-42-4-3(c). 2 . Ind.Code § 35-42-4-3(c). 3 . Ind.Code § 35-42-4-3(d). 4 . Ind.Code §§ 35-49-3-3, 35-49-2-2. 5 . Ind.Code §§ 35-49-3-1, 35-49-2-1.”
State v. Henry, 717 P.2d 189 (Or. Ct. App. 1986). “and Ind. Code § 35-49-3-1 ) adopt, almost verbatim, the Miller standard.”
Maddox Macy v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). “2 I.C. § 35-49-3-1(2). Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 12A02-1703-CR-440 | August 17, 2017 Page 2 of 7 Mark Schilling (“Sergeant Schilling”) was dispatched to respond to Anderson’s complaint.”
Terik C. Prater v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2016). “” The charging Information alleged only that Prater “knowingly or intentionally distribute[d]” photographs of his erect penis to T.”
— Ind. Code § 35-49-3-1(2) — 3 cases
Fordyce v. State, 569 N.E.2d 357 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991). “NOTES [1] Ind. Code 35-49-3-1(2) (1988). [2] Pope v.”
Maddox Macy v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2017). “2 I.C. § 35-49-3-1(2). Court of Appeals of Indiana | Memorandum Decision 12A02-1703-CR-440 | August 17, 2017 Page 2 of 7 Mark Schilling (“Sergeant Schilling”) was dispatched to respond to Anderson’s complaint.”
Terik C. Prater v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.) (Ind. Ct. App. 2016). “” The charging Information alleged only that Prater “knowingly or intentionally distribute[d]” photographs of his erect penis to T.”
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.