La. R.S. » RS
Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 14:89 (2026)

Crime against nature

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

NOTE: This provision of law was included in the Unconstitutional Statutes Biennial Report to the Legislature, dated March 14, 2016.

4. CRIME AGAINST NATURE

§89. Crime against nature

            A. Crime against nature is either of the following:

            (1) The unnatural carnal copulation by a human being with another of the same sex or opposite sex, except that anal sexual intercourse between two human beings shall not be deemed as a crime against nature when done under any of the circumstances described in R.S. 14:41, 42, 42.1, or 43. Emission is not necessary; and, when committed by a human being with another, the use of the genital organ of one of the offenders of whatever sex is sufficient to constitute the crime.

            (2) The marriage to, or sexual intercourse with, any ascendant or descendant, brother or sister, uncle or niece, aunt or nephew, with knowledge of their relationship. The relationship must be by consanguinity, but it is immaterial whether the parties to the act are related to one another by the whole or half blood. The provisions of this Paragraph shall not apply where one person, not a resident of this state at the time of the celebration of his marriage, contracted a marriage lawful at the place of celebration and thereafter removed to this state.

            B.(1) Whoever commits the offense of crime against nature as defined by Paragraph (A)(1) of this Section shall be fined not more than two thousand dollars, imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than five years, or both.

            (2) Whoever commits the offense of crime against nature as defined by Paragraph (A)(1) of this Section with a person under the age of eighteen years shall be fined not more than fifty thousand dollars, imprisoned at hard labor for not less than fifteen years nor more than fifty years, or both.

            (3) Whoever commits the offense of crime against nature as defined by Paragraph (A)(1) of this Section with a person under the age of fourteen years shall be fined not more than seventy-five thousand dollars, imprisoned at hard labor for not less than twenty-five years nor more than fifty years, or both.

            (4) Whoever commits the offense of crime against nature as defined by Paragraph (A)(2) of this Section, where the crime is between an ascendant and descendant, or between brother and sister, shall be imprisoned at hard labor for not more than fifteen years.

            (5) Whoever commits the offense of crime against nature as defined by Paragraph (A)(2) of this Section, where the crime is between uncle and niece, or aunt and nephew, shall be fined not more than one thousand dollars, or imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than five years, or both.

            C.(1) It shall be an affirmative defense to prosecution for a violation of Paragraph (A)(1) of this Section that, during the time of the alleged commission of the offense, the defendant was a victim of trafficking of children for sexual purposes as provided in R.S. 14:46.3(E). Any child determined to be a victim pursuant to the provisions of this Paragraph shall be eligible for specialized services for sexually exploited children.

            (2) It shall be an affirmative defense to prosecution for a violation of Paragraph (A)(1) of this Section that, during the time of the alleged commission of the offense, the defendant is determined to be a victim of human trafficking pursuant to the provisions of R.S. 14:46.2(F). Any person determined to be a victim pursuant to the provisions of this Paragraph shall be notified of any treatment or specialized services for sexually exploited persons to the extent that such services are available.

             D. The provisions of Act No. 177 of the 2014 Regular Session and the provisions of Act No. 602 of the 2014 Regular Session incorporate the elements of the crimes of incest (R.S. 14:78) and aggravated incest (R.S. 14:78.1), as they existed prior to their repeal by these Acts, into the provisions of the crimes of crime against nature (R.S. 14:89) and aggravated crime against nature (R.S. 14:89.1), respectively. For purposes of the provisions amended by Act No. 177 of the 2014 Regular Session and Act No. 602 of the 2014 Regular Session, a conviction for a violation of R.S. 14:89(A)(2) shall be the same as a conviction for the crime of incest (R.S. 14:78) and a conviction for a violation of R.S. 14:89.1(A)(2) shall be the same as a conviction for the crime of aggravated incest (R.S. 14:78.1). Neither Act shall be construed to alleviate any person convicted or adjudicated delinquent of incest (R.S. 14:78) or aggravated incest (R.S. 14:78.1) from any requirement, obligation, or consequence imposed by law resulting from that conviction or adjudication including but not limited to any requirements regarding sex offender registration and notification, parental rights, probation, parole, sentencing, or any other requirement, obligation, or consequence imposed by law resulting from that conviction or adjudication.

            E. Nothing in Act No. 485 of the 2018 Regular Session of the Legislature shall be construed to alleviate any person convicted or adjudicated delinquent of crime against nature (R.S. 14:89) from any requirement, obligation, or consequence imposed by law resulting from that conviction or adjudication including but not limited to any requirements regarding sex offender registration and notification, parental rights, probation, parole, sentencing, or any other requirement, obligation, or consequence imposed by law resulting from that conviction or adjudication.

            Amended by Acts 1975, No. 612, §1; Acts 1982, No. 703, §1; Acts 2010, No. 882, §1; Acts 2012, No. 446, §1; Acts 2013, No. 83, §1; Acts 2014, No. 177, §1; Acts 2014, No. 564, §1; Acts 2014, No. 599, §1, eff. June 12, 2014, Acts 2014, No. 602, §4, eff. June 12, 2014; Acts 2018, No. 485, §1, eff. May 25, 2018.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 190 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1957–2025 · leading case: State v. Baxley, 656 So. 2d 973 (La. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Baxley, 656 So. 2d 973 (La. 1995). · cites it 41× “R.S. 14:89. [1] Baxley filed a motion to quash the bill of information, claiming the statute was unconstitutional on numerous grounds.”
State v. Jones, 74 So. 3d 197 (La. 2011). · cites it 45× “He was arrested and charged with committing a "crime against nature" under La.Rev.Stat. § 14:89. The then-current version of § 14:89, which has since been *206 amended, included two subsections: § 14:89(A)(1), which forbid the "unnatural carnal copulation by a human being with…”
State v. Baxley, 633 So. 2d 142 (La. 1994). · cites it 33× “[1] This is a direct appeal from a trial court judgment holding the crime against nature statute, LSA-R.S. 14:89, an unconstitutional invasion of a citizen's right to privacy under La.”
State v. Smith, 661 So. 2d 442 (La. 1995). · cites it 8× “R.S. 14:89, the legislature has proscribed two types of conduct, each of which constitutes a crime against nature.”
State v. Thomas, 891 So. 2d 1233 (La. 2005). · cites it 25× “FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND By bill of information, the State charged Tina Thomas with soliciting an undercover officer to engage in "unnatural oral copulation for compensation" in violation of LSA-R.S. 14:89, based on events that occurred on April 10, 1995.”
State v. Smith, 766 So. 2d 501 (La. 2000). · cites it 6× “§ 21-3505 (1989); La.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 14:89 (West 1994); Mass.”
State v. Ryans, 513 So. 2d 386 (La. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 7× “R.S. 14:89, Crime Against Nature. At sentencing defendant admitted the allegations of a bill of information filed by the district attorney under La.”
State v. Phillips, 365 So. 2d 1304 (La. 1978). · cites it 5× “R.S. 14:89 (1975) and 14:89.1 (1962), prohibiting crime against nature and aggravated crime against nature respectively, are unconstitutionally vague; II.”
State v. Mills, 505 So. 2d 933 (La. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “1, 2, 3 & 9— Motion to Quash the Indictment By these assignments of error, defendant contends the trial court erred in denying *939 his motion to quash the indictment on the following grounds: 1) LSA-R.S. 14:89 is unconstitutional; 2) the indictment fails to allege with…”
State v. Lindsey, 310 So. 2d 89 (La. 1975). · cites it 11× “On June 17, 1974, defendant was charged by bill of information with having engaged in unnatural carnal copulation in violation of R.S. 14:89. Defendant filed a motion to quash the information on the ground that the statute that she was alleged to have violated was…”
State v. Stevenson, 778 So. 2d 1165 (La. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 3× “R.S. 14:89. Defendant filed a motion to quash the charge alleged in the bill, on the ground that the statute under which she was charged was unconstitutional.”
Jegley v. Picado, 80 S.W.3d 332 (Ark. 2002). · cites it 2× “201); Louisiana-La. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 14:89 (1986); Mississippi- Miss.”
Show all 190 citing cases →
La. Rev. Stat. § 14:89(2): 8 cases
State v. Hamilton, 677 So. 2d 539 (La. Ct. App. 1996).
State v. Lacy, 782 So. 2d 47 (La. Ct. App. 2001).
State v. Noel, 585 So. 2d 652 (La. Ct. App. 1991).
State v. Winborn, 604 So. 2d 177 (La. Ct. App. 1992).
State v. Krogh, 659 So. 2d 533 (La. Ct. App. 1995).
La. Rev. Stat. § 14:89(A): 6 cases
State v. Jones, 74 So. 3d 197 (La. 2011). “He was arrested and charged with committing a "crime against nature" under La.Rev.Stat. § 14:89. The then-current version of § 14:89, which has since been *206 amended, included two subsections: § 14:89(A)(1), which forbid the "unnatural carnal copulation by a human being with…”
State v. Lambert, 749 So. 2d 739 (La. Ct. App. 1999).
State v. Darbonne, 787 So. 2d 576 (La. Ct. App. 2001).
State v. Smith, 645 So. 2d 817 (La. Ct. App. 1994).
Louisiana Electorate of Gays & Lesbians, Inc. v. Connick, 902 So. 2d 1090 (La. Ct. App. 2005).
La. Rev. Stat. § 14:89(A)(1): 24 cases
State v. Jones, 74 So. 3d 197 (La. 2011). “He was arrested and charged with committing a "crime against nature" under La.Rev.Stat. § 14:89. The then-current version of § 14:89, which has since been *206 amended, included two subsections: § 14:89(A)(1), which forbid the "unnatural carnal copulation by a human being with…”
State v. Smith, 661 So. 2d 442 (La. 1995). “R.S. 14:89, the legislature has proscribed two types of conduct, each of which constitutes a crime against nature.”
State v. Baxley, 633 So. 2d 142 (La. 1994). “[1] This is a direct appeal from a trial court judgment holding the crime against nature statute, LSA-R.S. 14:89, an unconstitutional invasion of a citizen's right to privacy under La.”
State v. Baxley, 656 So. 2d 973 (La. 1995). “R.S. 14:89. [1] Baxley filed a motion to quash the bill of information, claiming the statute was unconstitutional on numerous grounds.”
State v. Thomas, 891 So. 2d 1233 (La. 2005). “FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND By bill of information, the State charged Tina Thomas with soliciting an undercover officer to engage in "unnatural oral copulation for compensation" in violation of LSA-R.S. 14:89, based on events that occurred on April 10, 1995.”
La. Rev. Stat. § 14:89(A)(2): 63 cases
State v. Baxley, 656 So. 2d 973 (La. 1995). “R.S. 14:89. [1] Baxley filed a motion to quash the bill of information, claiming the statute was unconstitutional on numerous grounds.”
State v. Jones, 74 So. 3d 197 (La. 2011). “He was arrested and charged with committing a "crime against nature" under La.Rev.Stat. § 14:89. The then-current version of § 14:89, which has since been *206 amended, included two subsections: § 14:89(A)(1), which forbid the "unnatural carnal copulation by a human being with…”
State v. Thomas, 891 So. 2d 1233 (La. 2005). “FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND By bill of information, the State charged Tina Thomas with soliciting an undercover officer to engage in "unnatural oral copulation for compensation" in violation of LSA-R.S. 14:89, based on events that occurred on April 10, 1995.”
State v. Smith, 661 So. 2d 442 (La. 1995). “R.S. 14:89, the legislature has proscribed two types of conduct, each of which constitutes a crime against nature.”
State v. Weaver, 805 So. 2d 166 (La. 2002).
La. Rev. Stat. § 14:89(A)(6): 1 case
State v. Smith, 645 So. 2d 817 (La. Ct. App. 1994).
La. Rev. Stat. § 14:89(A)(l): 1 case
State v. Amos, 849 So. 2d 498 (La. 2003).
La. Rev. Stat. § 14:89(B): 3 cases
State v. Baxley, 656 So. 2d 973 (La. 1995). “R.S. 14:89. [1] Baxley filed a motion to quash the bill of information, claiming the statute was unconstitutional on numerous grounds.”
Doe v. Jindal, 851 F. Supp. 2d 995 (E.D. La. 2012).
State v. Barousse, 442 So. 2d 1220 (La. Ct. App. 1983).
La. Rev. Stat. § 14:89(B)(2): 2 cases
State of Louisiana Versus Nicholas Pullen (La. Ct. App. 2019).
State of Louisiana Versus Evan Bradford (La. Ct. App. 2024).
La. Rev. Stat. § 14:89(D): 1 case
State v. Tyler, 182 So. 3d 1029 (La. Ct. App. 2015).
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.