United States First Circuit

Sentence on a defendant convicted of possessing child pornography is affirmed where: 1) the district court properly interpreted the trafficking cross-reference under U.S.S.G. section 2G2.4(c)(2) to include situations in which a defendant intended to exchange child pornography without any commercial purpose; 2) defendant's argument that the government must necessarily show the defendant actively and subjectively desired that others would get images of child pornography from him and that ordinary general intent does not suffice is rejected; 3) district court did not err in concluding that defendant's online conduct showed an "intent to traffic" under section 2G2.4(c)(2); and 4) defendant's argument that agent's testimony violated his Confrontation Clause rights because the grand jury testimony was never part of the record and because he had no chance to challenge that testimony during the sentencing hearing is rejected as without merit.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/28/2009
• Published 12/28/2009

Judges

• LYNCH, Chief Judge., Before LYNCH, Chief Judge, TORRUELLA and RIPPLE , Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States First Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• William S. Maddox, for appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Renée M. Bunker, Assistant United States Attorney, with whom Paula D. Silsby, United States Attorney was on brief, for appellee.