United States Eighth Circuit

In a prosecution for distribution of child pornography, the forfeiture of defendant's property is affirmed where: 1) the evidence showed a substantial connection - not merely an incidental or fortuitous relationship - between the real property and the offenses; 2) because defendant's acreage was a single tract of land that was conveyed to him as a whole, the district court was correct to treat the entire acreage as a single piece of "property" when applying the statute; and 3) the relatively high recommended fine range did not suggest a minimal level of culpability, and a comparison of the forfeiture and the fine range suggested that the forfeiture was, at a minimum, presumptively not excessive.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/26/2010
• Published 05/26/2010

Judges

• COLLOTON, Circuit Judge., Before COLLOTON and BENTON, Circuit Judges, and PIERSOL,District Judge.

Court

• United States Eighth Circuit

Counsel