Las Vegas Sun: David Cooper sued Clark County in U.S. District Court in 2010 after he was denied a license to run a “high-end” swingers club, dubbed Sextasy, at the Commercial Center shopping mall on Sahara Avenue near Maryland Parkway. | Cooper v. Clark County Nevada, No. 11-16900 (9th Cir. May 21, 2013)
First Circuit panel, that includes David Souter, rejects First Amend. challenge to Fall River, MA SOB ordinance
Lund v. City of Fall River, No. 12-1758 (1st Cir. April 22, 2013)
Appellant, Gary Lund, contends that the City of Fall River’s zoning ordinances violate the First Amendment by preventing him from opening an adult entertainment establishment on land zoned industrial without providing an adequate opportunity elsewhere. The district court rejected his claim, and we affirm.
Washington Times: The Federal Communications Commission is mulling a change to a policy that, in effect, would open the doors to more obscenity on television and radio.
Findlaw: The appellate court, however, agreed with the First and Tenth Circuits that downloading images and videos containing child pornography from a peer-to-peer computer network and storing them in a shared folder accessible to other users on the network amounts to distribution under federal law. | U.S. v. Richardson IV
10th Circuit: Child porn restitution award requires showing that losses were proximately caused by defendant
U.S. v. Benoit, No. 12-5013 (10th Cir. April 2, 2013)
Finally, Benoit argues that the district court’s restitution order was improper. In accord with the majority of circuits to have considered the issue, we hold that 18 U.S.C. § 2259 requires a showing that a victim’s losses are proximately caused by the defendant’s conduct. See United States v. Aumais, 656 F.3d 147, 153 (2nd Cir. 2011). Because the district court did not explain whether specific losses suffered by the victim were proximately caused by Benoit’s actions, we remand for a redetermination of the portion of damages allocable to Benoit.
Conn. federal court upholds Milford’s SOB ordinance, except license posting requirement that requires licensee’s name
Keepers, Inc. v. City of Milford, Conn., Civ. No. 3:07-CV-1231 (D. Conn. Mar. 30, 2013) . . .
ULaw Today: Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Amy and Vicky, two child pornography victims, in an appeal brought by the Utah Appellate Clinic. | In re: Amy & Vicky
Sentencing Law and Policy Blog: A helpful reader alerted me to a notable ruling by a Sixth Circuit panel today in US v. Gamble, No. 11-5394 (6th Cir. Feb 27, 2013) (available here). Here is how the majority opinion gets started . . .
Emily Bazelon at the New York Times (1/24/13): In October, the Fifth Circuit ruled in Amy’s favor, in a 10 to 5 decision. The court also accepted the theory of joint and several liability, finding that this means of allocating shared responsibility can ensure “that Amy receives the full amount of her losses, to the extent possible, while also ensuring that no defendant bears more responsibility than is required for full restitution.” . . . The Fifth Circuit’s decision creates a clear split among the appeals courts over how to interpret Congress’ provision of restitution for sex-crime victims — a split that only the Supreme Court can resolve. Cassell and Marsh have asked the justices to do that, and the court could hear a restitution case as early as next fall. | In re Amy Unknown, No. 09-41238 (5th Cir. March 22, 2011)