Online Solicitation of a Minor vs. Transmission of Material Harmful to Minors in Florida

July 18, 2025 Don Pumphrey, Jr. Criminal Defense, Sex Crimes, Social Media Social Share

In Florida, transmission of material harmful to minors (Fla. Stat. Section 847.0138) and online solicitation of a minor (Fla. Stat. Section 847.0135(3)) are both serious third-degree felonies that may be easily confused with one another. A minor under these statutes is defined as a person under the age of 18.

However, these are distinct crimes which may be charged separately depending on the facts of the case. This blog will compare and contrast the offenses of transmission of material harmful to minors and online solicitation of a minor, as well as outline penalties and potential defenses to both of these charges.

Transmission of Material Harmful to Minors

For someone to be proven guilty of transmission of material harmful to minors, the State must establish the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

• The defendant must have knowingly transmitted a message electronically (by email, text or other digital messaging)
• The transmission was material harmful to minors (defined as appealing to a “prurient interest,” offensive, and lacking “serious value” for minors)
• The recipient was a specific individual known or believed by the defendant to be a minor at the time

Each individual transmission of a photograph or message consisting of material that is harmful to minors (in violation of Fla. Stat. Section 847.0138) is considered a separate offense. If a single message has ten “harmful” images in it, this is considered ten separate counts. Allen v. State, 82 So.3d 118 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)

Transmission of material harmful to minors is a third-degree felony in Florida, punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a $5,000 fine. 

Note: Someone outside Florida may be charged if they transmitted the prohibited electronic communication (image, video, etc.) to a minor or someone believed to be a minor (such as an undercover officer) who was in Florida at the time. Simmons v. State, 886 So.2d 399 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)

Under Fla. Stat. Section 847.001(7), material that is allegedly harmful to minors that is electronically transmitted must be the following criteria to be criminal:

• The material is a reproduction, imitation, characterization, description, exhibition, presentation, or representation, of whatever kind or form, depicting nudity, sexual conduct, or sexual excitement
• It predominantly appeals to a prurient (excessively sexual), shameful or morbid interest
• It is “patently offensive” to prevailing standards of the adult community as a whole in terms of what is considered suitable conduct for minors
• When taken as a whole, the material is without serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors

Examples of materials that likely qualify as harmful to minors (and thus illegal if transmitted to a minor or someone believed to be a minor) may include:

• Pornographic videos with no context or value
• Sexual cartoon or anime-type images that may involve minors or depict graphic sex acts (even if animated, this is “prurient” and offensive)
• Erotic chat or text messages with explicit descriptions of sex acts
• Unsolicited photos of genitalia, breasts, etc.

Conversely, examples that likely would not violate Fla. Stat. Section 847.0138 may include: 

• Sex education content from a medical website, health class, etc.
• Classical art or sculpture depicting nudity (many Renaissance-era works)
• Literature with sexual themes (such as Romeo and Juliet or Catcher in the Rye)
• Textbook illustrations of human anatomy or reproduction

Online Solicitation of a Minor

On the other hand, online solicitation of a minor (Fla. Stat. Section 847.0135(3)) is a similar but distinct crime that involves the solicitation of a minor (under 18) or someone believed to be a minor to engage in sexual activity.

For someone to be proven guilty, the State must prove the following beyond a reasonable doubt:

• The defendant knowingly used a computer, online service, internet service, bulletin board service, or any electronic device
• The defendant seduced, solicited, lured or enticed the minor (or person believed to be a minor) to engage in unlawful sexual activity
• The communication was with a minor or someone believed to be a minor at the time

Online solicitation of a minor is considered a third-degree felony in Florida (punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a $5,000 fine). However, if someone misrepresents their age in soliciting a minor or someone believed to be a minor to engage in sexual activity, this is a second-degree felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

In many online solicitation cases, a point of contention is whether an actual solicitation took place. However, someone charged does not have to explicitly request a particular sex act to be proven guilty of online solicitation.

Under Grohs v. State, 944 So.2d 450 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006), someone violates the statute if they send an online communication to a minor (or someone believed to be a minor), which is intended to do one or more of the following: 

• “Command, encourage, hire, or request the victim to engage in sexual activity.” (Solicit)
• “Carry out the physical seduction of the victim and/or entice them to sexual intercourse.” (Seduce)
• “Draw with a hint of pleasure or gain, and/or attract actively and strongly (the victim).” (Lure)
• “Attract artfully or adroitly or by arousing hope or desire and/or tempt (the victim),” and/or “lure, induce, tempt, incite, or persuade a person (the victim) to engage in sexual activity.” (Entice)

Because of their similarities, various overlapping defenses exist to charges of transmission of harmful material to minors (Fla. Stat. Section 847.0138) and online solicitation of a minor (Fla. Stat. Section 847.0135(3)). These include:

• Entrapment: Objective entrapment requires a showing of police misconduct that “shocks the conscience” and fundamentally violates a defendant’s due process rights. Subjective entrapment (Fla. Stat. Section 777.201) requires the defendant to prove inducement to commit the crime by the State, and if shown, the State must show predisposition of the defendant to act beyond a reasonable doubt. 
• No electronic medium used: If the solicitation of harmful material was transmitted by alternative means, the statute may not cover it (such as if it occurs in person)
• No true belief: A defendant may argue if ensnared in a police sting that they did not truly believe they were corresponding with a minor
• Insufficient evidence: Uncertainty regarding who actually transmitted the prohibited materials/solicitation (especially if no traveling to meet the minor and the device has multiple users)

There are also various “non-defenses” to these charges – which fail as a matter of law in Florida. These include:

• Minor initiated contact: If the solicitation/harmful transmission occurred, it does not matter who initiated the communications – it is still a crime.
• Mistake of age: If an actual minor is involved, the argument that someone believed they were communicating with an adult is not a defense.
• No physical contact/act: These laws do not require a physical sex act occur – only that the prohibited communication(s) be transmitted to a minor or someone believed to be a minor.
• Consent: Minors cannot consent to being solicited online or receiving harmful materials that otherwise violate Fla. Stat. Section 847.0138.

In sum, transmission of harmful material to minors (Fla. Stat. Section 847.0138) and online solicitation of a minor (Fla. Stat. Section 847.0135(3)) are very serious third-degree felony offenses in Florida, punishable by up to 5 years in prison and a $5,000 fine. If someone solicits a minor (or someone believed to be a minor) online and misrepresents their own age in the process, it is a second-degree felony (up to 15 years in prison and a $10,000 fine).

Transmission of material harmful to minors requires that the defendant send an electronic image, video, or message containing excessively sexual material to a minor (or someone believed to be a minor) that has no serious political, literary or artistic value. Online solicitation requires that a defendant seduce, solicit, lure or entice a minor (or someone believed to be a minor) to engage in sexual activity, even if the activity never actually occurs. 

Various defenses exist to both of these charges, one or more of which may be relevant in a given case. These include entrapment, lack of electronic medium, lack of belief that the recipient was a minor (if it was an undercover officer), insufficient evidence/mistaken identity, and many more. 

If someone is charged with solicitation of a minor or transmission of material harmful to minors, it is critical to find experienced and trusted legal representation as soon as possible. This vital decision could make the difference in whether or not a person is subject to a lengthy prison term, hefty fines, and whether they are required to register as a sex offender for the rest of their life.

Criminal Defense Attorney in Tallahassee, FL

Don Pumphrey, Jr. is a Former Prosecutor, Former State Police Officer, Lifetime Member of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers; for over 25 years as a private defense attorney who is Trusted, Experienced, Aggressive in Criminal Defense as a Trial Attorney, Criminal Lawyer, Criminal Defense Lawyer for the accused in Florida State Courts located in Tallahassee, Florida but handling cases throughout the State of Florida.

Don Pumphrey, Jr. and the Tallahassee criminal defense lawyers at Pumphrey Law have decades of experience fighting drug charges on behalf of clients and winning. Call Pumphrey Law now at (850) 681-7777 to learn more about what we can do for you. Our lawyers will be happy to provide you with a free consultation.

  Social Share