Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.684 (2026)

Encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      163.684 Encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree. (1) A person commits the crime of encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree if the person:

      (a)(A) Knowingly develops, duplicates, publishes, prints, disseminates, exchanges, displays, finances, attempts to finance or sells a visual recording of sexually explicit conduct involving a child or knowingly possesses, accesses or views such a visual recording with the intent to develop, duplicate, publish, print, disseminate, exchange, display or sell it; or

      (B) Knowingly brings into this state, or causes to be brought or sent into this state, for sale or distribution, a visual recording of sexually explicit conduct involving a child; and

      (b) Knows or is aware of and consciously disregards the fact that creation of the visual recording of sexually explicit conduct involved child abuse.

      (2) Encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree is a Class B felony. [1995 c.768 §2; 2011 c.515 §3]

 

      163.685 [1985 c.557 §6; 1987 c.864 §12; repealed by 1991 c.664 §12]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 71 cases (21 in the last 5 years), 2001–2026 · leading case: State v. Reeves, 280 P.3d 994 (Or. Ct. App. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Reeves, 280 P.3d 994 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 25× “Following a bench trial, defendant was convicted of 15 counts of encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree, ORS 163.684, 1 based on 15 still image and movie files recovered from his personal computer.”
State v. Andrew William Betnar, 166 P.3d 554 (Or. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 20× “Following a trial to the court, defendant was convicted of 199 counts of encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree, ORS 163.684, based on evidence that he duplicated or printed 199 sexually explicit images of children.”
State v. Bray, 160 P.3d 983 (Or. 2007). · cites it 9× “” Based on the 11 images of child pornography found on defendant’s computer, the state charged him with 11 counts of first-degree encouraging child sexual abuse, ORS 163.684, and 11 counts of second-degree encouraging child sexual abuse, ORS 163.”
State v. Parker, 314 P.3d 980 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 10× “ORS 163.684 (2009). 1 We review for errors of law to determine whether defendant’s sentence “[e]xceeds the maximum allowable by law” or “ [i] s unconstitutionally cruel and unusual.”
State v. DiMolfetto, 342 Or. App. 456 (Or. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 17× “670 and ORS 163.684, as violating his free speech rights; (4) state and federal con- frontation clause challenges to the admission of out-of-court statements by non-testifying complainants; and (5) 23 chal- lenges to the sufficiency of evidence supporting his convic- tions.”
State v. Bates, 472 P.3d 768 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 20× “Held: Because the child did not participate or engage in the sexually explicit conduct depicted in the video at issue, the video was not “a visual recording of sexually explicit conduct involving a child” for purposes of ORS 163.684. Accordingly, the trial court erred in failing…”
State v. McNutt, 463 P.3d 563 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 17× “The trial court ruled that the affidavit filed in support of the warrant did not establish probable cause that the files on defendant’s computer contained child pornography in violation of ORS 163.684 and ORS 163.686. Held: The affidavit included three sets of facts that…”
State v. Urbina, 278 P.3d 33 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 16× “427, first-degree encouraging child sexual abuse, ORS 163.684, compelling prostitution, ORS 167.”
State v. Pugh, 297 P.3d 27 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 16× “Defendant was convicted on 18 counts of first-degree encouraging child sexual abuse, ORS 163.684 (2001). 1 He appeals the trial court’s denial of his motions for a judgment of acquittal based on the state’s failure to prove that he knowingly duplicated an image of sexually…”
State v. Bray, 104 P.3d 631 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 14× “Defendant appeals from his convictions and sentences on four counts of encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree, ORS 163.684, and 11 counts of encouraging child sexual abuse in the second degree, ORS 163.”
State v. Carey-Martin, 430 P.3d 98 (Or. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 3× “" We have characterized ORS 163.670 as describing the most serious of a group of related offenses that concern the visual recording and observation of children engaged in sexually explicit conduct that also include encouraging child sexual abuse, ORS 163.”
State v. Dulfu, 426 P.3d 641 (Or. 2018). · cites it 3× “For each of the 15 files, the state charged defendant with one count of encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree (ECSA I), ORS 163.684, and one count of encouraging child sexual abuse in the second degree (ECSA II), ORS 163.”
Show all 71 citing cases →
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.684(1) — 6 cases
State v. Garrett, 455 P.3d 979 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
State v. Cannon, 537 P.3d 182 (Or. Ct. App. 2023).
State v. Bray, 104 P.3d 631 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “Defendant appeals from his convictions and sentences on four counts of encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree, ORS 163.684, and 11 counts of encouraging child sexual abuse in the second degree, ORS 163.”
State v. Navaie, 362 P.3d 710 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
Denton v. Nooth, 388 P.3d 341 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.684(1)(a)(A) — 2 cases
State v. Bates, 472 P.3d 768 (Or. Ct. App. 2020). “Held: Because the child did not participate or engage in the sexually explicit conduct depicted in the video at issue, the video was not “a visual recording of sexually explicit conduct involving a child” for purposes of ORS 163.684. Accordingly, the trial court erred in failing…”
State v. Dulfu, 426 P.3d 641 (Or. 2018). “For each of the 15 files, the state charged defendant with one count of encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree (ECSA I), ORS 163.684, and one count of encouraging child sexual abuse in the second degree (ECSA II), ORS 163.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.684(1)(b) — 3 cases
State v. Reeves, 280 P.3d 994 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “Following a bench trial, defendant was convicted of 15 counts of encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree, ORS 163.684, 1 based on 15 still image and movie files recovered from his personal computer.”
State v. Propp, 345 Or. App. 376 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
State v. Propp, 345 Or. App. 376 (Or. Ct. App. 2025).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.684(2) — 1 case
State v. Parker, 314 P.3d 980 (Or. Ct. App. 2013). “ORS 163.684 (2009). 1 We review for errors of law to determine whether defendant’s sentence “[e]xceeds the maximum allowable by law” or “ [i] s unconstitutionally cruel and unusual.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.684(l)(a)(A) — 3 cases
State v. Bray, 104 P.3d 631 (Or. Ct. App. 2005). “Defendant appeals from his convictions and sentences on four counts of encouraging child sexual abuse in the first degree, ORS 163.684, and 11 counts of encouraging child sexual abuse in the second degree, ORS 163.”
State v. J. C. L., 325 P.3d 740 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
State v. Urbina, 278 P.3d 33 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “427, first-degree encouraging child sexual abuse, ORS 163.684, compelling prostitution, ORS 167.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 163.684(l)(b) — 1 case
State v. Richardson, 323 P.3d 311 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
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.