US-CA11 · jury_instructions
11th Cir. Pattern Jury Instr. (Criminal) O57
Interstate Transportation of Obscene Material
(for Purpose of Sale or Distribution)
18 U.S.C. § 1465
It’s a Federal crime to transport obscene materials in interstate commerce for
the purpose of selling or distributing them.
The Defendant can be found guilty of this crime only if all the following
facts are proved beyond a reasonable doubt:
(1) the Defendant knowingly transported the materials described in
the indictment in interstate commerce;
(2) the Defendant transported the materials to sell or distribute them;
(3) when the materials were transported, the Defendant knew the
general sexual nature of the material’s content; and
(4) the material was legally obscene.
To move something in “interstate commerce” is to move it from one state
into another state.
To transport material with “the purpose to sell or distribute” is to move the
material with the intent to transfer the material to someone else, even if no money
is involved.
[You may presume that the Defendant intended to sell or distribute the
material if the material comprised two or more of any article of the kind described
in the indictment; or a combined total of five publications or articles of the kind
described in the indictment.
But that presumption may be overcome or outweighed by other evidence.]
The Government doesn’t have to prove that the Defendant knew the material
was legally obscene. It only has to prove that the Defendant knew the general
sexual nature of the material.
So if you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant moved the
material in interstate commerce and knew about the material’s general sexual
nature, and if you find that the material was legally obscene, as I’ll shortly define
that word for you, then you may find that the Defendant knew the material was
obscene.
Freedom of expression is a constitutional right that is fundamental to our
system, and we all enjoy it. It has contributed much to the development and well -
being of our free society. In exercising this right, sex may be portrayed and the
subject of sex may be discussed freely and publicly. Material may not be
condemned merely because it contains passages or sequences that describe or
depict sexual activity. But the constitutional right to free expression doesn’t extend
to legally obscene material.
To prove beyond a reasonable doubt that material is legally obscene, the
Government must prove three things:
(1) that the material predominantly appeals to prurient interest;
(2) that it depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive
way; and
(3) that it lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
First, you must view the material as a whole, keeping in mind the intended
and probable audience, and decide whether the material’s predominant theme or
purpose is an appeal to the prurient interest of an average person of the community
as a whole [or the prurient interest of members of a deviant sexual group, as the
case may be].
An appeal to “prurient” interest is an appeal to a morbid, degrading, and
unhealthy interest in sex, not just an ordinary interest.
Viewing the material as a whole for the “predominant theme or purpose of
the material” means looking for the main or principal focus of the whole work
based on its total effect, not on the focus of incidental themes or isolated passages
or sequences.
To decide whether the material appeals to a morbid, degrading, or unhealthy
interest in sex of the “average person of the community as a whole,” you must
consider the contemporary community standards that would be applied by an
average person with an ordinary attitude toward and interest in sex.
Contemporary community standards are those accepted by the community as
a whole; in other words, what society at large or people in general will accept. It
does not include what some groups in the community believe the community
should accept or refuse to accept.
But customs and standards change. So the community as a whole may
decide to accept things that weren’t acceptable before. What matters is what is
acceptable now.
So obscenity is not a matter of individual or personal taste or how the
material strikes an individual juror – whether something is obscene or not depends
on what the average person of the community as a whole would think of it.
[In addition to considering the viewpoint of a normal person, you can
determine whether the material has prurient appeal by considering the sexual
interest of a clearly defined deviant group, such as sadomasochists. You must find
beyond a reasonable doubt that the material appeals to the prurient interest of such
a group.]
Second, you must decide whether the material depicts or describes, in a
patently offensive way, sexual conduct such as ultimate sexual acts or
masturbation, excretory functions, or lewd exhibition of the genitals. But you must
not judge the material by your own standards. You must judge the material by
contemporary community standards and decide whether the material exceeds the
generally accepted limits of public tolerance and is clearly offensive.
I emphasize that whether material appeals to a prurient interest or whether it
is patently offensive must be judged by contemporary community standards, not by
how the material affects you personally. You must consider the material in the
same way that an average person in the community, with a normal attitude toward
and interest in sex would consider it.
Contemporary community standards are those accepted by the community as
a whole; in other words, what society at large or people in general will accept. It
does not include what some groups in the community believe the community
should accept or refuse to accept.
Third, you must decide whether the material lacks serious literary, artistic,
political or scientific value. An item may portray explicit sexual conduct and still
have serious value in one or more of these areas. You must decide whether the
material in this case has such value. The ideas represented in a work do not need
majority approval to be worthy of protection.
So for this decision, you should not use contemporary community standards.
Instead, you must objectively decide whether a reasonable person considering the
material as a whole would find it has or does not have serious literary, artistic,
political, or scientific value.
The Government must prove all three things before you can decide the
material is obscene. If any one of those things is not proved, then the material is
not obscene within the meaning of the law.
Provenance
- Source
- ca11.uscourts.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-08-20
- Edition
- criminal-2025-09
- Content hash
79284aa7fa481cdef2c1d016fbbc13bb0d9b49d328691eda999e14e4c9cbbfa8
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.