<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Community Defense Counsel &#187; State: New York</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/tag/state-new-york/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress</link>
	<description>Protecting Children and Their Neighborhoods</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 17:30:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>NY High Court: Viewing child pornography online is not necessarily possession under state law</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/05/08/viewing-child-pornography-online-is-not-necessarily-possession-under-state-law-ny-top-court/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/05/08/viewing-child-pornography-online-is-not-necessarily-possession-under-state-law-ny-top-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 21:28:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Child Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Pornography Possession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: People v. Kent]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2696</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://newsandinsight.thomsonreuters.com/Legal/News/2012/05_-_May/Viewing_child_pornography_is_not_necessarily_possession-NY_top_court/">Reuters</a>:  Viewing child pornography on the Internet without taking further action such as printing or saving files does not necessarily constitute possession, NewYork's top court ruled on Tuesday. &#124; <a href="http://www.nycourts.gov/ctapps/Decisions/2012/May12/70opn12.pdf">People v. Kent</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2012/05/08/viewing-child-pornography-online-is-not-necessarily-possession-under-state-law-ny-top-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Case highlights inconsistency between N.Y. statutory rape laws, federal child porn laws</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/08/04/case-highlights-inconsistency-between-n-y-statutory-rape-laws-federal-child-porn-laws/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/08/04/case-highlights-inconsistency-between-n-y-statutory-rape-laws-federal-child-porn-laws/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2010 19:57:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: 2nd Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Child Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Sentencing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Sexting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2293</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202464239348">Law.com</a>: "A federal appeals panel has thrown out a child pornography conviction that was based on explicit photographs texted by a 17-year-old to her field-hockey coach. The 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals held there was no evidence that defendant Todd Broxmeyer asked 17-year-old 'A.W.' to take the pictures, and therefore no evidence that he 'produced' them as defined by the federal child pornography statutes." &#124; <a href="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/9ea04a55-5ad3-43fd-9a1c-abe4fb26fae1/1/doc/09-1457-cr_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/9ea04a55-5ad3-43fd-9a1c-abe4fb26fae1/1/hilite/"><em>USA v. Broxmeyer</em></a>, No. 09-1457-cr (2nd Cir. Aug. 3, 2010)]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/08/04/case-highlights-inconsistency-between-n-y-statutory-rape-laws-federal-child-porn-laws/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Law Review: Alternatives for Adult Uses Required When Town is Sued</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/05/26/law-review-alternatives-for-adult-uses-required-when-town-is-sued/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/05/26/law-review-alternatives-for-adult-uses-required-when-town-is-sued/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 22:05:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal Periodicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Legal Periodicals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Alternative Sites]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Zoning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: TJS of New York v Town of Smithtown]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2264</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<em>Alternatives for Adult Uses Required When Town is Sued</em>
Anthony S. Guardino, 5/26/2010 N.Y.L.J. 5, (col. 2)

"The particular issue in TJS was whether the constitutionality of a zoning ordinance should only be evaluated with regard to the ‘alternative avenues of communication‘ the ordinance left open at the time it was passed, or those it left open at the time it was challenged."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/05/26/law-review-alternatives-for-adult-uses-required-when-town-is-sued/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Defiant judge takes on child pornography law</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/05/21/defiant-judge-takes-on-child-pornography-law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/05/21/defiant-judge-takes-on-child-pornography-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 May 2010 17:59:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles: Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Articles: Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: 2nd Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Child Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Sentencing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: USA v. Dorvee]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2256</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/22/nyregion/22judge.html?pagewanted=all">Defiant judge takes on child pornography law</a>
New York Times, A. G. Sulzberger, 5.21.2010

"In his 43-year career as a federal  judge, Jack B. Weinstein has come to be identified by his efforts to  combat what he calls ‘the unnecessary cruelty of the law.’ His most recent crusade is particularly striking because of the beneficiary: a man who has amassed a vast collection of child pornography."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/05/21/defiant-judge-takes-on-child-pornography-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>2nd Circuit: Courts must consider &#8220;adequacy of alternative sites&#8221; at time of challenge to SOB ordinance</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/03/10/2nd-circuit-courts-must-consider-adequacy-of-alternative-sites-at-time-of-challenge-to-sob-ordinance/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/03/10/2nd-circuit-courts-must-consider-adequacy-of-alternative-sites-at-time-of-challenge-to-sob-ordinance/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:04:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Alternative Sites]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Zoning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: TJS of New York v Town of Smithtown]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=2145</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.communitydefense.org/cases/20100310.pdf"><em>TJS of New York, Inc. v. Town of Smithtown</em></a>, No. 08-2789-cv (2nd Cir. March 10, 2010)

2nd Circuit: When evaluating First Amendment challenges to a zoning ordinance, a court must consider the adequacy of alternatives at the time the ordinance is challenged.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/03/10/2nd-circuit-courts-must-consider-adequacy-of-alternative-sites-at-time-of-challenge-to-sob-ordinance/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NY Court clarifies role of ISPs in child pornography cases</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/02/03/ny-court-clarifies-role-of-isps-in-child-pornography-cases/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/02/03/ny-court-clarifies-role-of-isps-in-child-pornography-cases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:05:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Group: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Child Pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Internet Service Providers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ZZ: People v Eames]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=1989</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.communitydefense.org/cases/20100203.pdf"><em>People v. Eames</em></a>, 3274/2009, Supreme Court, New York County (Feb. 3, 2010)

Internet Service Providers are not "arm of law enforcement" when they forward detected child pornography to National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2010/02/03/ny-court-clarifies-role-of-isps-in-child-pornography-cases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>4th Circuit upholds N.C. city&#8217;s SOB law</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/06/12/4th-circuit-upholds-n-c-citys-sob-law/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/06/12/4th-circuit-upholds-n-c-citys-sob-law/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 22:32:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Case Abstracts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court: 4th Circuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB): Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New York]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=786</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/analysis.aspx?id=21696">First Amendment Center</a>: "Adult businesses are not entitled to challenge whether they cause adverse effects in their neighborhoods after a new zoning law has been enacted, a federal appeals court has ruled." Opinion is <a href="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/081654.P.pdf">here</a>.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/06/12/4th-circuit-upholds-n-c-citys-sob-law/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>1990-1997: National Law Center Summaries of &#8220;SOB Land Use&#8221; Studies</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/02/24/nlc-summaries-of-sob-land-use-studies/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/02/24/nlc-summaries-of-sob-land-use-studies/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 01:21:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Studies: Sexually Oriented Businesses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Studies: Sexually Oriented Businesses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB): Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB): Economic Impact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB): Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects: Quality of Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Zoning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Arizona]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Oklahoma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Texas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Virginia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: Wisconsin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Minors]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=69</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Crime Impact Studies by Municipal and State Governments on Harmful Secondary Effects of Sexually Oriented Businesses.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2009/02/24/nlc-summaries-of-sob-land-use-studies/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>March 2007: Secondary Effects Study of Adult Oriented Business, City of Saratoga Springs, New York</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2007/03/07/new-york-saratoga-springs-sob-study/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2007/03/07/new-york-saratoga-springs-sob-study/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Mar 2007 06:24:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Studies: Sexually Oriented Businesses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Studies: Sexually Oriented Businesses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB): Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB): Economic Impact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects: Quality of Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Zoning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New York]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=64</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.saratoga-springs.org/docs/BDDocument.asp?Action=VIEW&#038;ID={095819EA-95DC-4796-8908-4F45EB81B53C}">Saratoga Springs Planning Board</a>: "The Mayor has specifically asked that the Planning Board "undertake a study of the potential secondary effects of adult uses in the City and produce recommendations for amendments to the City Code for the suitable siting, land use and zoning standards and controls therefore."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/2007/03/07/new-york-saratoga-springs-sob-study/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>January 1998: Adult Business Study Ellicottville, NY</title>
		<link>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/1998/01/01/ellicottville-ny-adult-business-study/</link>
		<comments>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/1998/01/01/ellicottville-ny-adult-business-study/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Jan 1998 21:45:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Studies: Sexually Oriented Businesses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Category: Studies: Sexually Oriented Businesses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB): Crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects (SOB): Economic Impact]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Effects: Quality of Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Regulation (SOB): Zoning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[State: New York]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Topic: Minors]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://communitydefense.org/wordpress/?p=298</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.communitydefense.org/cdcdocs/landuse/html/nycatarauguscounty.html">Adult Business Study</a>: "The potential secondary effects examined relate to economic impacts, property values, fear of crime, and the negative impact on community character."]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.communitydefense.org/wordpress/1998/01/01/ellicottville-ny-adult-business-study/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

