Notes of Decisions
Cited in
81
cases (
26 in the last 5 years), 2004–2026 · leading case:
United States v. Whorley, 550 F.3d 326 (4th Cir. 2008).
United States v. Whorley, 550 F.3d 326 (4th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 24× “See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A(a), 2252A(b)(1). Thus, the 240-month sentence imposed by the district court was an increase of 33% above the Guideline sentence of 180 months' imprisonment.”
United States v. Schales, 546 F.3d 965 (9th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 21× “knowingly produces, distributes, receives, or possesses with intent to distribute, a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that .”
United States v. Bowersox, 72 M.J. 71 (C.A.A.F. 2013).
· cites it 30× “First, Appellant claims that the application of § 1466A(b)(1) to his case is unconstitutional because the statute requires that a real minor be depicted and no real 4 The scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A is limited by subsection (b) to “[a]ny person .”
United States v. John Farrar, 876 F.3d 702 (5th Cir. 2017).
· cites it 9× “Amendment on two bases: it is grossly disproportionate to his crime as applied; and, a ten-year minimum for repeat-offenders in possession of obscene material is categorically disproportionate.”
United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285 (2008).
· cites it 2× “One would think that this principle resolves the present case, since the statute criminalizes only offers to provide or requests to obtain contrabandchild obscenity and child pornography involving actual children, both of which are proscribed, see 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a), §…”
United States v. Handley, 564 F. Supp. 2d 996 (S.D. Iowa 2008).
· cites it 17× “On May 5, 2008, Defendant filed this motion to dismiss, arguing the statute upon which the indictment is based violates the First and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution and that the facts alleged do not support an indictment for violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A,…”
United States v. Dean, 635 F.3d 1200 (11th Cir. 2011).
· cites it 6× “18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a). We note that the statute prohibits specific sexual acts, and that it incorporates only one of the three Miller prongs — i.”
United States v. Goluba, 672 F.3d 304 (5th Cir. 2012).
· cites it 6× “2 of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines applies to the child pornography offenses set forth in 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A, 2252, 2252(A)(a)-(b), and 2260(b).”
United States v. Reingold, 731 F.3d 204 (2d Cir. 2013).
· cites it 2× “2 applies to defendants convicted of the myriad offenses proscribed by 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A, 2251(d)(1)(A), 2252, 2252A(a) and (b), and 2260(b).”
United States v. Jason M. Moriarty, 429 F.3d 1012 (11th Cir. 2005).
· cites it 3× “10 Although a guilty *1024 plea to violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a) subjects the offender to “the penalties provided in section 2252A(b)(1),” a lifelong term of supervised release is not a penalty-provided in § 2252A(b)(1).”
United States v. Erik Jenkins, 712 F.3d 209 (5th Cir. 2013).
· cites it 2× “§ 2252 (a)(4)(B); one count of receiving obscene material depicting sexual abuse of a child in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(l); and one count of possessing obscene material depicting sexual abuse of a child in violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Thielemann, 575 F.3d 265 (3rd Cir. 2009).
· cites it 2× “§ 2252A(a)(5)(B) & *269 (b)(2); Counts Thirteen through Seventeen, receipt/distribution of obscenity depicting children in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A(a)(2)(A) & (B), and 2252A(b)(l); and Count Eighteen, possession of obscenity depicting children in violation of 18 U.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a) — 15 cases
United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285 (2008).
“One would think that this principle resolves the present case, since the statute criminalizes only offers to provide or requests to obtain contrabandchild obscenity and child pornography involving actual children, both of which are proscribed, see 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a), §…”
United States v. Whorley, 550 F.3d 326 (4th Cir. 2008).
“See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A(a), 2252A(b)(1). Thus, the 240-month sentence imposed by the district court was an increase of 33% above the Guideline sentence of 180 months' imprisonment.”
United States v. Handley, 564 F. Supp. 2d 996 (S.D. Iowa 2008).
“On May 5, 2008, Defendant filed this motion to dismiss, arguing the statute upon which the indictment is based violates the First and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution and that the facts alleged do not support an indictment for violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A,…”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(1) — 16 cases
United States v. Whorley, 550 F.3d 326 (4th Cir. 2008).
“See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A(a), 2252A(b)(1). Thus, the 240-month sentence imposed by the district court was an increase of 33% above the Guideline sentence of 180 months' imprisonment.”
United States v. Jason M. Moriarty, 429 F.3d 1012 (11th Cir. 2005).
“10 Although a guilty *1024 plea to violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a) subjects the offender to “the penalties provided in section 2252A(b)(1),” a lifelong term of supervised release is not a penalty-provided in § 2252A(b)(1).”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(1)(A) — 2 cases
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(1)(B) — 1 case
United States v. Whorley, 550 F.3d 326 (4th Cir. 2008).
“See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A(a), 2252A(b)(1). Thus, the 240-month sentence imposed by the district court was an increase of 33% above the Guideline sentence of 180 months' imprisonment.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(2) — 3 cases
United States v. Dean, 635 F.3d 1200 (11th Cir. 2011).
“18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a). We note that the statute prohibits specific sexual acts, and that it incorporates only one of the three Miller prongs — i.”
United States v. Whorley, 550 F.3d 326 (4th Cir. 2008).
“See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A(a), 2252A(b)(1). Thus, the 240-month sentence imposed by the district court was an increase of 33% above the Guideline sentence of 180 months' imprisonment.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(2)(A) — 2 cases
United States v. Thielemann, 575 F.3d 265 (3rd Cir. 2009).
“§ 2252A(a)(5)(B) & *269 (b)(2); Counts Thirteen through Seventeen, receipt/distribution of obscenity depicting children in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A(a)(2)(A) & (B), and 2252A(b)(l); and Count Eighteen, possession of obscenity depicting children in violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Dean, 635 F.3d 1200 (11th Cir. 2011).
“18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a). We note that the statute prohibits specific sexual acts, and that it incorporates only one of the three Miller prongs — i.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(2)(B) — 2 cases
United States v. Dean, 635 F.3d 1200 (11th Cir. 2011).
“18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a). We note that the statute prohibits specific sexual acts, and that it incorporates only one of the three Miller prongs — i.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(l) — 8 cases
United States v. Schales, 546 F.3d 965 (9th Cir. 2008).
“knowingly produces, distributes, receives, or possesses with intent to distribute, a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that .”
United States v. Whorley, 550 F.3d 326 (4th Cir. 2008).
“See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A(a), 2252A(b)(1). Thus, the 240-month sentence imposed by the district court was an increase of 33% above the Guideline sentence of 180 months' imprisonment.”
United States v. Erik Jenkins, 712 F.3d 209 (5th Cir. 2013).
“§ 2252 (a)(4)(B); one count of receiving obscene material depicting sexual abuse of a child in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(l); and one count of possessing obscene material depicting sexual abuse of a child in violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Handley, 564 F. Supp. 2d 996 (S.D. Iowa 2008).
“On May 5, 2008, Defendant filed this motion to dismiss, arguing the statute upon which the indictment is based violates the First and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution and that the facts alleged do not support an indictment for violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A,…”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(l)(B) — 1 case
United States v. Whorley, 550 F.3d 326 (4th Cir. 2008).
“See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A(a), 2252A(b)(1). Thus, the 240-month sentence imposed by the district court was an increase of 33% above the Guideline sentence of 180 months' imprisonment.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b) — 13 cases
United States v. Bowersox, 72 M.J. 71 (C.A.A.F. 2013).
“First, Appellant claims that the application of § 1466A(b)(1) to his case is unconstitutional because the statute requires that a real minor be depicted and no real 4 The scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A is limited by subsection (b) to “[a]ny person .”
United States v. Handley, 564 F. Supp. 2d 996 (S.D. Iowa 2008).
“On May 5, 2008, Defendant filed this motion to dismiss, arguing the statute upon which the indictment is based violates the First and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution and that the facts alleged do not support an indictment for violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A,…”
United States v. Goluba, 672 F.3d 304 (5th Cir. 2012).
“2 of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines applies to the child pornography offenses set forth in 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A, 2252, 2252(A)(a)-(b), and 2260(b).”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b)(1) — 15 cases
United States v. John Farrar, 876 F.3d 702 (5th Cir. 2017).
“Amendment on two bases: it is grossly disproportionate to his crime as applied; and, a ten-year minimum for repeat-offenders in possession of obscene material is categorically disproportionate.”
United States v. Bowersox, 72 M.J. 71 (C.A.A.F. 2013).
“First, Appellant claims that the application of § 1466A(b)(1) to his case is unconstitutional because the statute requires that a real minor be depicted and no real 4 The scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A is limited by subsection (b) to “[a]ny person .”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b)(1)(2006) — 1 case
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b)(1)(A) — 2 cases
United States v. Bowersox, 72 M.J. 71 (C.A.A.F. 2013).
“First, Appellant claims that the application of § 1466A(b)(1) to his case is unconstitutional because the statute requires that a real minor be depicted and no real 4 The scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A is limited by subsection (b) to “[a]ny person .”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b)(1)(B) — 1 case
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b)(2)(A) — 2 cases
United States v. Thielemann, 575 F.3d 265 (3rd Cir. 2009).
“§ 2252A(a)(5)(B) & *269 (b)(2); Counts Thirteen through Seventeen, receipt/distribution of obscenity depicting children in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A(a)(2)(A) & (B), and 2252A(b)(l); and Count Eighteen, possession of obscenity depicting children in violation of 18 U.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b)(l) — 4 cases
United States v. Bowersox, 72 M.J. 71 (C.A.A.F. 2013).
“First, Appellant claims that the application of § 1466A(b)(1) to his case is unconstitutional because the statute requires that a real minor be depicted and no real 4 The scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A is limited by subsection (b) to “[a]ny person .”
United States v. Erik Jenkins, 712 F.3d 209 (5th Cir. 2013).
“§ 2252 (a)(4)(B); one count of receiving obscene material depicting sexual abuse of a child in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(l); and one count of possessing obscene material depicting sexual abuse of a child in violation of 18 U.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b)(l)(A) — 1 case
United States v. Bowersox, 72 M.J. 71 (C.A.A.F. 2013).
“First, Appellant claims that the application of § 1466A(b)(1) to his case is unconstitutional because the statute requires that a real minor be depicted and no real 4 The scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A is limited by subsection (b) to “[a]ny person .”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(b)(l)(B) — 1 case
United States v. Bowersox, 72 M.J. 71 (C.A.A.F. 2013).
“First, Appellant claims that the application of § 1466A(b)(1) to his case is unconstitutional because the statute requires that a real minor be depicted and no real 4 The scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A is limited by subsection (b) to “[a]ny person .”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(c) — 7 cases
United States v. Whorley, 550 F.3d 326 (4th Cir. 2008).
“See 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A(a), 2252A(b)(1). Thus, the 240-month sentence imposed by the district court was an increase of 33% above the Guideline sentence of 180 months' imprisonment.”
United States v. Schales, 546 F.3d 965 (9th Cir. 2008).
“knowingly produces, distributes, receives, or possesses with intent to distribute, a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that .”
United States v. Bowersox, 72 M.J. 71 (C.A.A.F. 2013).
“First, Appellant claims that the application of § 1466A(b)(1) to his case is unconstitutional because the statute requires that a real minor be depicted and no real 4 The scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A is limited by subsection (b) to “[a]ny person .”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(d) — 1 case
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(d)(5) — 3 cases
United States v. Bowersox, 72 M.J. 71 (C.A.A.F. 2013).
“First, Appellant claims that the application of § 1466A(b)(1) to his case is unconstitutional because the statute requires that a real minor be depicted and no real 4 The scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A is limited by subsection (b) to “[a]ny person .”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(e) — 2 cases
United States v. Handley, 564 F. Supp. 2d 996 (S.D. Iowa 2008).
“On May 5, 2008, Defendant filed this motion to dismiss, arguing the statute upon which the indictment is based violates the First and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution and that the facts alleged do not support an indictment for violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1466A,…”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(f) — 1 case
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(f)(1) — 2 cases
United States v. Bowersox, 72 M.J. 71 (C.A.A.F. 2013).
“First, Appellant claims that the application of § 1466A(b)(1) to his case is unconstitutional because the statute requires that a real minor be depicted and no real 4 The scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A is limited by subsection (b) to “[a]ny person .”
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(f)(2) — 2 cases
— 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(f)(l) — 1 case
United States v. Bowersox, 72 M.J. 71 (C.A.A.F. 2013).
“First, Appellant claims that the application of § 1466A(b)(1) to his case is unconstitutional because the statute requires that a real minor be depicted and no real 4 The scope of 18 U.S.C. § 1466A is limited by subsection (b) to “[a]ny person .”
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.