OUJI-CR 4-135A



No person may be convicted of buying/possessing/procuring child pornography unless the State has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each element of the crime. These elements are:

First, willfully;

Second, buying/procuring/possessing;

Third, child pornography.

You are instructed that the word "willfully," as used in these instructions, requires that you must find beyond a reasonable doubt from all the evidence in this case

(either direct or circumstantial or both) that the defendant knew the nature and character of the contents of [specify alleged child pornography]. It is not necessary that [Name of Defendant] knew the exact content or actually saw/read the [specify alleged child pornography].


Statutory Authority: 21 O.S. Supp. 2000, § 1024.2.

Notes on Use

For the definition of child pornography, see OUJI-CR 4-139, infra.

Committee Comments

Section 1024.1 of Title 21 was amended in 2000 to limit its application to child pornography, instead of to obscene material.

The Court of Criminal Appeals decided in Glenn v. State, 1988 OK CR 16, ¶ 3, 749 P.2d 121, 124, that the Oklahoma's obscenity statute was not unconstitutionally vague, because it incorporated the standards from Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973).

The last paragraph of the instruction is required by Hanf v. State, 1977 OK CR 41, ¶ 16, 560 P.2d 207, 211; Trim v. State, 1996 OK CR 1, 909 P.2d 841; and Davis v. State, 1996 OK CR 15, ¶ 33, 916 P.2d 251, 260. See the Committee Comments to OUJI-CR 4-133, supra.

(2000 Supp.)