Miss. Code Ann. » Miss. Code Ann. / Title 97 / Chapter 5
Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 97-5-35 (2026)

Exploitation of children; penalties

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Any person who violates any provision of Section 97-5-33 shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction shall be fined not less than Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) nor more than Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000.00) and shall be imprisoned for not less than five (5) years nor more than forty (40) years. Any person convicted of a second or subsequent violation of Section 97-5-33 shall be fined not less than One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00) nor more than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) and shall be confined in the custody of the Department of Corrections for life or such lesser term as the court may determine, but not less than twenty (20) years.

Laws, 1979, ch. 479, § 3; Laws, 1995, ch. 484, § 3; Laws, 2003, ch. 562, § 3; Laws, 2005, ch. 467, § 2; Laws, 2005, ch. 491, § 2, eff. 7/1/2005.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2008–2025 · leading case: Britton v. State, 130 So. 3d 90 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Britton v. State, 130 So. 3d 90 (Miss. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “See Miss.Code Ann. § 97-5-35 (Rev.2006) (“Any person who violates any provision of Section 97-5-33 shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction .”
United States v. Polizzi, 549 F. Supp. 2d 308 (E.D.N.Y 2008). “1(E) (two years); Miss.Code Ann. § 97-5-35 (five years); Mont.”
Robert W. Triplett v. State of Mississippi, 207 So. 3d 1288 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “Triplett also alleges the trial court erred by ordering his sentence for child exploitation to run consecutively to any sentence he was currently serving.”
Christopher J.K. Morgan a/k/a Christopher J. Morgan a/k/a Christopher Joseph Kirk Morgan v. State of Mississippi, 419 So. 3d 456 (Miss. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 8× “” The circuit court also held Morgan’s sentence of forty years—with twenty-five years to serve and fifteen years of post- release supervision—was both legal and proportionate, as it was within the parameters set by Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-5-35 (Rev. 2014).4 Lastly,…”
William Jeffrey Knight v. State of Mississippi (Miss. 2025). · cites it 4× “” Miss. Code Ann. § 97-5-35 (Rev. 2014). Section 97-5-23(1) provides the penalties for violations of Section 97-5-23(1), instructing that any person found guilty under Section 97-5-23(1) may be sentenced to “not less that two (2) years nor more than fifteen (15) years .”
Ransom Levi Matheny v. State of Mississippi, 289 So. 3d 328 (Miss. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “Miss. Code Ann. § 97-5-35 (Rev. 2006). Here, Matheny pleaded guilty to two counts of child exploitation under section 97-5- 33(6).”
Adam Brent Wallace v. State of Mississippi; (Miss. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-5-35 (Rev. 2006) states: Any person who violates any provision of Section 97-5-33 shall be guilty of a felony and upon conviction shall be fined not less than Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.”
Terrance Alexander a/k/a Terrance Lamont Alexander v. State of Mississippi, 406 So. 3d 774 (Miss. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “” Miss. Code Ann. § 97-5-35 (Rev. 2014). In the case at hand, Alexander was found guilty of all six counts of child exploitation under Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-5-33(6).”
James Carroll a/k/a James Malcolm Carroll, III a/k/a James M. Carroll v. State of Mississippi (Miss. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× ““By statute, any person who violates any provision of section 97-5-33 may be fined a maximum of $500,000 and a minimum of $50,000, and the person may be imprisoned for a maximum of forty years and a minimum of five years.”
Aguirre v. State, 25 So. 3d 1102 (Miss. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “Both the imprisonment and fine were the minimum penalties allowed under Mississippi Code Annotated section 97-5-35 (Rev.2006). ¶ 3. Aguirre, appearing pro se, filed a number of documents with the.”
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.