United States First Circuit

The district court's denial of the petition for collateral relief challenging petitioner's conviction for child pornography is affirmed, where: 1) the proffered factual testimony concerning the relationship between petitioner and the minor and concerning the specific circumstances surrounding the production of the sexually explicit photographs does not support a lawful defense to whether Ortiz "used" the minor within the meaning of the production statute, and therefore the petition for relief due to ineffective assistance of counsel was properly denied for failing to establish prejudice; 2) any error in the district court's evidentiary rulings excluding the minor's testimony regarding the nature of her relationship with petitioner was harmless; 3) the facts of this case do not make out a claim of unconstitutionality; and 4) despite the difference between the local age of consent and the federal age of majority, petitioner's claim of actual innocence fails.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/20/2014
• Published 06/20/2014

Judges

• HOWARD

Court

• United States First Circuit

Counsel