Internet sex crime allegations in California represent one of the most sensitive and aggressive areas of criminal law. From accusations of possession of child pornography to online solicitation, these charges carry not only the weight of potential prison time, but also lifetime sex offender registration under California Penal Code §290. What complicates these cases further is their technical nature—digital evidence, forensic artifacts, and metadata often make or break the case.
Former Prosecutors Now Defending the Accused
Our team includes former senior prosecutors who once pursued Internet sex crime convictions. We now use that insider knowledge to craft strategic defenses for individuals accused of these highly stigmatized offenses. We understand how district attorneys think, how digital evidence is compiled, and the aggressive tactics law enforcement deploys. That means we’re not just playing defense—we’re anticipating the prosecution’s every move.
What Is an Internet Sex Crime?
Internet sex crimes are offenses committed online or through the use of electronic devices. These include a range of charges such as:
- Possession, distribution, or creation of child pornography
- Online solicitation of a minor
- Sexting involving minors
- Dissemination of obscene or harmful material
- Engaging in sex tourism or planning unlawful acts across borders
Each charge brings its own legal elements and evidentiary hurdles—and defending against them requires both legal insight and technical fluency.
Child Pornography: Zero Tolerance and High Stakes
Child pornography charges are among the most aggressively prosecuted Internet sex crimes in California. Under Penal Code §311, it is a felony to knowingly possess, distribute, produce, or access child pornography. Law enforcement agencies often use sophisticated surveillance tools to track downloads and exchanges of illegal content, and they frequently coordinate with federal authorities such as the FBI or Homeland Security.
The stakes are enormous: convictions often lead to state prison time, mandatory registration as a sex offender, and long-term restrictions on where you can live or work. However, defenses may include lack of knowledge, mistaken identity, or illegal search and seizure. Our firm thoroughly analyzes the origin and chain of custody of any digital files used as evidence.
Obscene Material and California Law
The definition of “obscenity” under the law is far from straightforward. While California allows for the distribution of adult material, it becomes a crime when the content meets the three-pronged Miller test for obscenity: whether the average person would find the work appeals to prurient interest, whether it depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and whether it lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
Defendants in obscenity cases often face charges simply for transmitting or storing sexually explicit content that law enforcement claims is harmful to minors. We explore First Amendment defenses, contextual intent, and whether any minors were actually exposed to the content in question.
Online Solicitation and Sting Operations
Online solicitation—also known as “luring a minor”—is typically charged under Penal Code §288.3 and §288.4. These cases often involve undercover operations where police pose as minors in chat rooms, social media, or dating apps. Shows like “To Catch a Predator” have made these stings high profile, but not all stings are legally sound.
We closely examine the methods used in sting operations. Was the client truly the initiator? Was entrapment involved? Did law enforcement follow proper procedure? A successful defense might rest on showing that the accused had no real intent to meet a minor or that the communication was misrepresented or coerced.