United States Ninth Circuit

Convictions of defendant for possessing child pornography and for distributing the same child pornography are vacated and the case is remanded, where: 1) possessing child pornography and distributing the same child pornography does not amount to double jeopardy; 2) sharing child pornography through a peer-to-peer network amounts to distribution, even though the distributor does not take some concrete affirmative action for the particular download that is charged as the distribution; and 3) United States v. Curtin requires reversal in this case under Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 403 because the record, briefs, and oral argument establish that the district court erred when it admitted certain statements and a letter without reading or listening to the material.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/26/2015
• Published 01/26/2015

Judges

• Kleinfeld

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel