United States Eleventh Circuit

Defendant's conviction and sentence for production of child pornography are affirmed where: 1) defendant's argument that 18 U.S.C. section 2251(a) was unconstitutional as applied to his conduct was foreclosed by the court's earlier conclusion that Congress had broad authority to regulate both intrastate and interstate child pornography; and 2) the government's incremental need for the drug and stun gun evidence submitted at trial to overcome any potential doubt generated by the victim's inability to remember the events in question, and the overall similarity between the acts depicted on the tape and the events of the date of the offense rendered that evidence highly probative.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/02/2010
• Published 03/02/2010

Judges

Court

• United States Eleventh Circuit

Counsel