The United States Constitution affords criminal defendants numerous rights that are staunchly upheld. For example, under the Double Jeopardy clause, people can only be tried for a crime once; if the government cannot convict a defendant of an offense the first time, it does not get another shot. This does not mean that a person cannot be charged with multiple crimes related to the same incident, though, as demonstrated in a recent child pornography case in which a Florida court denied a defendant’s motion to dismiss his indictment on double jeopardy grounds. If you are faced with accusations that you committed a child pornography offense, it is advisable to contact a Sarasota sex crime defense attorney as soon as possible.

The Facts of the Case

Reportedly, the defendant was charged with soliciting for child pornography. The case proceeded to trial, and the jury found him guilty, based on the standard established by the controlling precedent in the Circuit. The court later overturned the ruling establishing the standard, and the defendant successfully moved for a judgment of acquittal. Concurrently, the government charged the defendant with attempting to produce child pornography. The second charge arose out of the same conduct as the first charge. Thus, the defendant moved to dismiss the new charge against him, arguing that he could not be tried for the same conduct twice under the Double Jeopardy Clause of the United States Constitution. The trial court denied his motion, and he appealed.

The Double Jeopardy Clause of the United States Constitution

If the same behavior violates two statutory provisions, the court conducting a double jeopardy analysis must first determine whether the legislature intended each violation to be charged as a separate offense. If the court cannot ascertain the congressional intent, it will apply the Blockburger test established by the Supreme Court.

The post Florida Court Discusses Double Jeopardy in a Child Pornography Case appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Intent is an element of several criminal offenses. In other words, in order to achieve a conviction, the prosecution must show that the defendant possessed a certain mental state at the time the alleged acts were committed. It may be difficult for the prosecution to prove intent in cases involving the use of file sharing technology, though. A Florida court recently outlined what evidence is adequate to show that a defendant charged with distributing child pornography via a file sharing application had actual or constructive knowledge that he was committing a crime. If you’ve been charged with a sex crime against children, you should speak with an experienced Florida criminal defense attorney about your options.

The Alleged offense

It is reported that an undercover agent who was investigating people suspected of distributing child pornography, communicated with the defendant’s computer via a computer at a remote location. He subsequently installed an application on the defendant’s computer, which granted them access to share files. The agent was able to obtain multiple videos containing child pornography from the defendant’s computer on two occasions.

Allegedly, the state charged the defendant with using an electronic device to transmit child pornography. During the trial, he argued that he should be acquitted, on the basis that the prosecution had failed to prove that he had deliberately disseminated pornography. He was convicted and sentenced to eleven months in prison and three years on probation. He filed an appeal, claiming the trial court erred in refusing his petition for acquittal.

Proving Criminal Intent

The post Florida Court Discusses Criminal Intent appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Factual Background of the Case

It is reported that the defendant was charged with possession of child pornography. He pled guilty in exchange for a lesser sentence of sex offender probation for ten years. The defendant received a letter memorializing the terms of his probation, which were later orally pronounced at his sentencing hearing. The probationary terms included the requirement that the defendant could not view, own, access, or possess any pornographic materials that were relevant to his pattern of deviant behavior.

Allegedly, in March 2019, the State filed an affidavit stating that the defendant violated the terms of his probation after it was revealed that the defendant had a pornographic magazine. During the defendant’s probation violation hearing, the defendant argued that the magazine did not violate the terms of his probation, because it depicted adults and was not relevant to the deviant behavior associated with the offense of owning child pornography. The court disagreed, and the defendant was sentenced to prison, after which he appealed.

Evidence of a Violation of Terms of Probation

On appeal, the court noted that for the defendant’s possession of pornography to violate his probation, it must be relevant to his pattern of deviant behavior. The court further explained this required an assessment of not only the pornographic material but also of the circumstances underlying the defendant’s offenses. The court clarified that the defendant was not prohibited from owning pornographic material in general, but only barred from owning pornographic material that was related to his deviant behavior.

Further, the court noted that the trial court did not set forth any findings regarding the nature of the materials owned by the defendant or whether it related to his prior behavior patterns. Instead, the only evidence before the trial court regarding the materials in question noted that the materials depicted adults and could be purchased by anyone over the age of eighteen. Thus, the court reversed the order revoking the defendant’s probation and remanded the case for a new trial.

Speak with an Experienced Sex Crime Defense Attorney

If you are a Sarasota resident currently charged with a sex crime, it is in your best interest to speak with an experienced attorney regarding your case. William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a seasoned Sarasota sex crime defense attorney with the experience and skills required to help you strive for a favorable result. William Hanlon can be contacted at 941-462-1789 or via the form online to set up a confidential and free meeting.

The post Florida Court Discusses Evidence Proving Violations of Sex Offender Probation appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.

Factual Background

It is reported that following an incident in a dressing room at a thrift store, the police conducted an investigation regarding the defendant’s alleged videotaping of children. The police ultimately uncovered numerous photographs and videos of the defendant’s sister-in-law and her minor daughter, in which both the sister-in-law and daughter were nude. The police also found photographs in which the defendant’s penis was touching the minor daughter’s face and other photographs that depicted the defendant touching the child when she was asleep. The defendant was charged with approximately twenty sex crimes, including seven counts of sexual performance by a child. During the trial, the defendant moved for a judgment of acquittal. The motion was denied, and he was convicted on all charges, after which he appealed the denial of his motion.

Grounds for Granting a Motion for Acquittal

Under Florida law, a defendant filing a motion for judgment of acquittal may either argue that the State failed to present legally sufficient evidence that the defendant committed each element of the charged offense or in cases where the evidence is wholly circumstantial, that the State’s evidence is not inconsistent with any reasonable theory of innocence. To preserve either ground for seeking a judgment of acquittal, the defendant must identify the elements of the crime for which he or she alleges the State’s evidence is lacking, or in cases involving circumstantial evidence must outline the theory of his or her defense and explain why it is not inconsistent with the evidence presented.

In the subject case, the defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal argued that there was no proof that he induced or authorized the victim to engage in sex acts. On appeal, however, the defendant argued that the child was asleep in the photographs and that a sleeping victim cannot engage in sexual conduct. The court found that the defendant failed to preserve this argument, but rejected it nonetheless. Specifically, the court found that sexual conduct was defined broadly and did not require active participation by the victim. Thus, the court found no error in the denial of the defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal.

Meet with a Diligent Criminal Defense Attorney

If you are a resident of Sarasota currently charged with child pornography or a similar type of sex crime, it is wise to meet with a diligent defense attorney regarding your potential defenses. Attorney William Hanlon of Hanlon Law is a proficient Sarasota sex crime attorney who will work tirelessly to help you seek the best outcome available under the facts of your case. You can contact Mr. Hanlon at 941-462-1789 or via the form online to schedule a complimentary and free meeting.

The post Florida Court Discusses the Standards for Granting an Acquittal in a Sex Crime Case appeared first on Sarasota Criminal Attorney Blog.