- Child Pornography
- Domestic Violence Cases
- Driving under the influence (DUI)
- Drug Crimes
- Federal White Collar Crime
- Health Care Fraud
- International Criminal Law and Extradition
- Internet Crime
- Medical Marijuana
- Misdemeanor / Felony Crimes
- Money Laundering and Racketeering (RICO)
- Professional Licensure Issues
- Sex Crimes & Abuse Allegations
- August 9, 2017
Massachusetts Court Protects Medical Marijuana Use by Employees
- August 7, 2017
Pennsylvania Doctors Now Able to Register to Provide Medical Marijuana Prescriptions
- August 2, 2017
Colorado Court Says Alert from Drug Sniffing Dog is No Longer Enough to Search Car
- July 27, 2017
Medical Marijuana Dispensary Permits Awarded
- July 26, 2017
Recreational Marijuana Use in Nevada Hit a Minor Rough Patch
US Supreme Court Struggles with Child Pornography Restitution
Justices at the US Supreme Court on Wednesday grappled with the difficult question of whether a person convicted of downloading and possessing two computer images of child pornography can be forced to pay $3.4 million in restitution to the child-victim depicted in the two illicit images.
The justices are examining how judges are to award restitution payments to victims identified in confiscated images of child pornography. The restitution statute passed by Congress requires judges to order defendants to pay the full amount of the victim’s losses without regard to the proportion of harm they caused.
The case involves a Texas man, Doyle Randall Paroline, who pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography and was later presented with a restitution demand from a single child-victim for $3.4 million. Mr. Paroline was sentenced to two years in prison and 10 years of supervised release. Investigators examined Mr. Paroline’s computer and found 300 images of children engaged in various sexual acts. Two of the 300 photos involved a young girl referred to in court documents by the pseudonym “Amy.” Based on the two photos, Amy’s lawyer submitted a demand for full restitution of $3.4 million.
At issue is whether a person who is convicted of possessing child pornography (rather than producing it or distributing it) can be held responsible for the total amount of restitution sought by the child-victim identified in the illicit images even though the person did not cause all, or even most, of the victim’s injuries. That interpretation of the statute would ensure that child-victims receive restitution payments quickly and efficiently. But forcing someone to pay the full amount for a crime primarily committed by someone else raises basic issues of due process and fairness. The Justices are grappling with the notion that statute is designed for restitution and not fines. A final decision by the Court is expected by June.
All persons charged with crimes are entitled to the protections afforded by the United States Constitution and the rules of evidence in a criminal court of law. An experienced criminal defense attorney helps to ensure that a defendant’s rights are protected before, during and after a trial. If you have been charged with or convicted of a criminal offense, you should consult with a criminal defense attorney immediately. For a confidential consultation, contact the Law Offices of Marc Neff at (215) 563-9800 or via email at email@example.com.
Posted in: Child Pornography