§ 311. Consent.
(a) General rule.--The consent of the victim to conduct charged to constitute an offense or to the result
thereof is a defense if such consent negatives an element of the offense or precludes
the infliction of the harm or evil sought to be prevented by the law defining the
offense.
(b) Consent to bodily injury.--When conduct is charged to constitute an offense because it causes or threatens bodily
injury, consent to such conduct or to the infliction of such injury is a defense if:
(1) the conduct and the injury are reasonably foreseeable hazards of joint participation
in a lawful athletic contest or competitive sport; or
(2) the consent establishes a justification for the conduct under Chapter 5 of this title
(relating to general principles of justification).
(c) Ineffective consent.--Unless otherwise provided by this title or by the law defining the offense, assent
does not constitute consent if:
(1) it is given by a person who is legally incapacitated to authorize the conduct charged
to constitute the offense;
(2) it is given by a person who by reason of youth, mental disease or defect or intoxication
is manifestly unable or known by the actor to be unable to make a reasonable judgment
as to the nature or harmfulness of the conduct charged to constitute the offense;
(3) it is given by a person whose improvident consent is sought to be prevented by the
law defining the offense; or
(4) it is induced by force, duress or deception of a kind sought to be prevented by the
law defining the offense.
(Apr. 16, 1992, P.L.108, No.24, eff. 60 days)
1992 Amendment. Act 24 amended subsec. (c).
Cross References. Section 311 is referred to in sections 2607, 2718 of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
13
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1976–2025 · leading case:
Commonwealth v. Gonzalez, 109 A.3d 711 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
Commonwealth v. Gonzalez, 109 A.3d 711 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
“” 18 Pa.C.S. § 311(a). “Forcible compulsion” means “something more” than mere lack of consent.”
Commonwealth v. Cordoba, 902 A.2d 1280 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2006).
· cites it 3× “In particular, the criminal code codifies consent as a defense under 18 Pa.C.S. § 311 and it states that consent is ineffective when it is induced by deception.”
State of Tennessee v. Marcus Pope, 427 S.W.3d 363 (Tenn. 2013).
“Applying this interpretation of the statute to the facts in that case, the court held that [Regarded in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the evidence shows that [the victim] “let in” the first man because she recognized him as her boyfriend’s acquaintance and…”
Commonwealth v. Velez, 51 A.3d 260 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2012).
“18 Pa.C.S. § 311. This statute highlights the lack of careful construction of section 3125(b) since it is evident that a child under the age of thirteen is unable to *266 consent, yet lack of consent is included as a grounds to increase the grading of aggravated indecent assault…”
Commonwealth v. DeSumma, 559 A.2d 521 (Pa. 1989).
· cites it 2× “It was implicit in the quoted portion of Judge Wieand's dissenting opinion, supra, in that at least two defenses justification under 18 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. Jones, 363 A.2d 1281 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1976).
“§ 310 (military orders); 18 Pa.C.S. § 311 (consent); 18 Pa.C.S. § 312 (de minimis infractions).”
Commonwealth v. Checca, 491 A.2d 1358 (Pa. 1985).
“18 Pa.Cons.Stat. § 311 regarding consent as a defense to criminal offenses provides, in pertinent part: (a) General rule.”
Commonwealth v. Eckenrode, 81 Pa. D. & C.4th 330 (2006).
· cites it 2× “18 Pa.C.S. §311 (c)(2). Thus, defendant’s argument that he was too intoxicated to act with malice must fail.”
Com. v. Byrd, K. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
“” 18 Pa.C.S. § 311(a). “Forcible compulsion” means “something more” than mere lack of consent.”
Com. v. Phillips, E. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
“____________________________________________ 6 Consent is defined as follows: “The consent of the victim to conduct charged to constitute an offense or to the result thereof is a defense if such consent negatives an element of the offense or precludes the infliction of the harm…”
Com. v. Hernandez, J. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020).
“less otherwise provided by this title or by the law defining the offense, assent does not constitute consent if: * * * (2) it is given by a person who by reason of youth, mental disease or defect or intoxication is manifestly unable or known by the actor to be unable to make a…”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 311(a) — 4 cases
Commonwealth v. Gonzalez, 109 A.3d 711 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2015).
“” 18 Pa.C.S. § 311(a). “Forcible compulsion” means “something more” than mere lack of consent.”
Com. v. Byrd, K. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
“” 18 Pa.C.S. § 311(a). “Forcible compulsion” means “something more” than mere lack of consent.”
Com. v. Phillips, E. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
“____________________________________________ 6 Consent is defined as follows: “The consent of the victim to conduct charged to constitute an offense or to the result thereof is a defense if such consent negatives an element of the offense or precludes the infliction of the harm…”
Com. v. Hernandez, J. (Pa. Super. Ct. 2020).
“less otherwise provided by this title or by the law defining the offense, assent does not constitute consent if: * * * (2) it is given by a person who by reason of youth, mental disease or defect or intoxication is manifestly unable or known by the actor to be unable to make a…”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 311(b) — 1 case
Commonwealth v. Eckenrode, 81 Pa. D. & C.4th 330 (2006).
“18 Pa.C.S. §311 (c)(2). Thus, defendant’s argument that he was too intoxicated to act with malice must fail.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 311(c) — 2 cases
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 311(c)(4) — 2 cases
State of Tennessee v. Marcus Pope, 427 S.W.3d 363 (Tenn. 2013).
“Applying this interpretation of the statute to the facts in that case, the court held that [Regarded in the light most favorable to the Commonwealth, the evidence shows that [the victim] “let in” the first man because she recognized him as her boyfriend’s acquaintance and…”
Commonwealth v. Cordoba, 902 A.2d 1280 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2006).
“In particular, the criminal code codifies consent as a defense under 18 Pa.C.S. § 311 and it states that consent is ineffective when it is induced by deception.”
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.