Okla. Stat. » Title 21 — CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS
Oklahoma Statutes

Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1024.1 (2026)

See the following versions:

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section OK-LEGoklegislature.gov JustiaOkla. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

OS 21-1024.1v1 (HB 3936, Laws 2024, c. 59, 14) OS 21-1024.1v2 (SB 53, Laws 2025, c. 29, § 4)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1988–2025 · leading case: Brown v. State, 2008 OK CR 3 (Okla. Crim. App. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Brown v. State, 2008 OK CR 3 (Okla. Crim. App. 2008). · cites it 10× “¶ 5 Title 21 O.S.2001, § 1024.1 defines a digital/magnetic storage device containing lewd images of children as a distinct item of child pornography and photographic products as separate items.”
Purcell v. Commonwealth, 149 S.W.3d 382 (Ky. 2004). · cites it 2× “323; Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1024.1 ; Or.Rev.Stat.”
State of Tennessee v. Thomas Whited, 506 S.W.3d 416 (Tenn. 2016). “§ 30 -6A-2(A) (2016); Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1024.1 (A) (2015); 18 Pa.”
Camfield v. City of Oklahoma City, 248 F.3d 1214 (10th Cir. 2001). “Of particular relevance to this case, the Legislature narrowed the definition of “child pornography” prohibited by section 1021.2 to include only material in which a minor is actually “engaged in” or “observes” any of several statutorily-defined sexual acts.”
Davis v. State, 916 P.2d 251 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “The statutes at issue are found in 21 O.S.1991, §§ 1024.1(1) and 1024.2. Section 1024.”
Glenn v. State, 749 P.2d 121 (Okla. Crim. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “Appellant Glenn was the sole owner of the "adult" bookstore where the videotapes were available for viewing by depositing tokens, available at the bookstore, into videotape machines and viewing the tapes in individual viewing booths located in the store.”
Trim v. State, 909 P.2d 841 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “This argument balances precariously on the definition of "sexual conduct" found in 21 O.S.Supp. 1984, § 1024.1(3)(a): Acts of sexual intercourse including any intercourse which is normal or perverted, actual or simulated.”
Peninger v. State, 811 P.2d 609 (Okla. Crim. App. 1991). “The photographs were not evidence of a crime as they did not meet the definition of obscene material set forth in 21 O.S.1981, § 1024.1. Therefore, we find that the magistrate erred in issuing the search warrant based upon the foregoing information and that the evidence seized…”
Hamilton v. State, 2016 OK CR 13 (Okla. Crim. App. 2016). “Based on statutory language relevant to the particular charge (21 O.S.2001, § 1024.1), we held that the allowable unit of prosecution was each storage medium (e.”
Question Submitted by: The Honorable Julie Daniels, Oklahoma Senate, Dist. 29, 2025 OK AG 13 (Okla. Att’y Gen. 2025). · cites it 6× “21 O.S.Supp.2024, § 1024.1(B)(1). ¶7 Importantly, the definition of "obscene material" as established by the Miller test and adopted in Oklahoma first requires the performance to contain "sexual conduct.”
Revision of Portion of the Rules of the Court of Crim. Appeals, 2016 OK CR 20 (Okla. Crim. App. 2016). “2011, § 142A-9; (g) Any photograph or video depicting “Lewdness,” “Nudity,” “Sexual conduct,” “sexual excitement,” “Sadomasochistic abuse,” or “obscene material” as defined by 21 O.S.2011, §§ 1024.1,1030,1040.75. (h) Any document or materials which have been withheld, removed,…”
Revision of Portion of the Rules of the Court of Crim. Appeals, 2016 OK CR 20 (Okla. Crim. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “2011, § 142A-9; (g) Any photograph or video depicting "Lewdness," "Nudity," "Sexual conduct," "sexual excitement," "Sadomasochistic abuse," or "obscene material" as defined by 21 O.S.2011, §§ 1024.1, 1030, 1040.75. (h) Any document or materials which have been withheld, removed,…”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1024.1(1) — 1 case
Davis v. State, 916 P.2d 251 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996). “The statutes at issue are found in 21 O.S.1991, §§ 1024.1(1) and 1024.2. Section 1024.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1024.1(2)(c) — 1 case
Davis v. State, 916 P.2d 251 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996). “The statutes at issue are found in 21 O.S.1991, §§ 1024.1(1) and 1024.2. Section 1024.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1024.1(3)(a) — 1 case
Trim v. State, 909 P.2d 841 (Okla. Crim. App. 1996). “This argument balances precariously on the definition of "sexual conduct" found in 21 O.S.Supp. 1984, § 1024.1(3)(a): Acts of sexual intercourse including any intercourse which is normal or perverted, actual or simulated.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1024.1(A) — 2 cases
Brown v. State, 2008 OK CR 3 (Okla. Crim. App. 2008). “¶ 5 Title 21 O.S.2001, § 1024.1 defines a digital/magnetic storage device containing lewd images of children as a distinct item of child pornography and photographic products as separate items.”
Camfield v. City of Oklahoma City, 248 F.3d 1214 (10th Cir. 2001). “Of particular relevance to this case, the Legislature narrowed the definition of “child pornography” prohibited by section 1021.2 to include only material in which a minor is actually “engaged in” or “observes” any of several statutorily-defined sexual acts.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1024.1(B)(1) — 1 case
Question Submitted by: The Honorable Julie Daniels, Oklahoma Senate, Dist. 29, 2025 OK AG 13 (Okla. Att’y Gen. 2025). “21 O.S.Supp.2024, § 1024.1(B)(1). ¶7 Importantly, the definition of "obscene material" as established by the Miller test and adopted in Oklahoma first requires the performance to contain "sexual conduct.”
— Okla. Stat. tit. 21, § 1024.1(B)(3) — 1 case
Question Submitted by: The Honorable Julie Daniels, Oklahoma Senate, Dist. 29, 2025 OK AG 13 (Okla. Att’y Gen. 2025). “21 O.S.Supp.2024, § 1024.1(B)(1). ¶7 Importantly, the definition of "obscene material" as established by the Miller test and adopted in Oklahoma first requires the performance to contain "sexual conduct.”
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.