Reuters: A New York man imprisoned for possessing and receiving child pornography cannot argue that he was wrongly convicted because he never stored the images on his computer, a federal appeals court has ruled. In an opinion on Monday, a three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York considered for the first time whether viewing forbidden images on the Internet constitutes knowingly receiving and possessing them. | U.S. v. Ramos, No. 10-4802-cr
Reuters: 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. | People v. Kent
ULaw Today: The case involves an important issue of whether child pornography victims can recover all of their losses (e.g., psychological counseling and lost income) from one defendant or must apportion their losses out among multiple defendants. | USA v. Amy Unknown, No. 09-41238 (5th Cir.) Opening Brief
Reuters: A U.S. appeals court on Monday revived a lawsuit brought by members of the adult entertainment industry which challenges federal laws requiring pornography producers to report the ages of all performers.
| Free Speech Coalition v Attorney General, No. 10-4085 (3rd Cir. April 16, 2012) (Before SCIRICA, RENDELL, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. )
Findlaw: [Defendant] . . . argued that viewing and search for child pornography doesn’t qualify as receiving the images. The jury disagreed and convicted Sturm on both counts. Sturm appealed. This week, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Sturm’s convictions. | U.S. v. Sturm
Findlaw: What’s an appropriate sentence for a defendant who pleads guilty to possessing over 7,100 images of child pornography? While the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals declined to answer that precise question this week, it ruled that a one-day sentence and a $100 fine landed on the lax side of the child pornography sentence spectrum. | U.S. v. Robinson
How Appealing quotes and links to the AP and the earlier 5th Circuit opinion: A federal appeals court in New Orleans has agreed to rehear two cases in which a victim of child pornography sought restitution from men who viewed sexually explicit photographs of her on the Internet.” | In re: Amy Unknown.
Federal courts have disagreed about how to enforce a law that requires people convicted of possessing child pornography to pay restitution to the victim, even if they didn’t know the victim. But the Supreme Court refused to take up the case Monday . . . The case was Amy v. Monzel (11-85).
Sentencing Law and Policy:: The Second Circuit has today issued an important new opinion in the on-going saga concerning whether and how the kids victimized by being featured in illegal child pornography can secure restitution awards from defendants who downloaded these pictures via the internet. The panel opinion in US v. Aumais, No. 10-3160 (2d Cir. Sept. 8, 2011) (available here), gets started this way . . .
Toledo Blade: How long can a computer hard drive be left behind before it is considered abandoned and subject to search by police without a warrant? That was the question before the Ohio Supreme Court Wednesday as it weighed the child rape, child pornography, and other convictions of Dennis Gould . . . | Hat tip: How Appealing for providing a link to the documents, summary of the case, and video of the arguments.