Student Post - Sixth Circuit Affirms One-Day Setence for Downloading Child Pornography

In a September 2009 opinion, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a district court sentence of a one-day incarceration and ten-year period of supervised release after the defendant plead guilty to two counts of knowingly receiving child pornography. You may view the ruling in United States v. Stall, 581 F.3d 276 (6th Cir. 2009) here. From the opinion:

[Defendant] downloaded illegal porn which allegedly spanned a number of years and very likely involved more than 18 images. The images included photographs of adult men penetrating girls ages 12 and under, many of which were previously identified by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children as victims of sexual abuse. “Weighing in favor of a downward variance (of offense level), the presentence report (“PSR”) referenced Stall’s immediate expression of remorse and empathy for children harmed as a result [of his crime] as well as the fact that Stall quickly sought mental health treatment and continues to express significant remorse,” compounded with Stall being a first time offender.  Stalls at *4. The government urged the court to sentence Stall in accordance with the PSR, but did not make any affirmative arguments about why Stall’s circumstances compelled a specific sentence. “The government failed to specify that a noncustodial sentence would fail to adequately reflect the seriousness of the offense, promote respect for the law or provide just punishment.” Stall at * 14.  The Court held that the district court’s explanation for the extent of its downward variance was sufficient in light of the record made before it.

Distinguish this from United States v. Pugh, 515 F.3d 1179, 1202 (11th Cir. 2008), which held that “despite the district court’s strong conviction that Pugh would not suffer from recidivism, the resulting sentence did not provide a sufficient mechanism to monitor Pugh for a length time, and thus protect the public from any future crime.” See also United States v. Goldberg, 491 F.3d 668 (7th Cir. 2007) (Posner, J.) (holding that a one-day sentence for a defendant who possessed and offered to distributed child pornography was unreasonable).

Judge Rogers dissented from the Sixth Circuit panels' holding saying, “the one-day sentence in this case does not, with reasonable sufficiency, avoid disparity in sentencing or provide for general deterrence.I would therefore vacate the sentence as substantively unreasonable and remand."

Comments

[Joe]

I can see why this might become a more popular option as jails get more and more crowded. I wonder if the public will weigh child pornography or certain drug offenses to be more "dangerous" and worthy of incarceration.

[rodsmith3510]

i think the guy was an idiot. NO WAY he's gonna make 10 years of sex offender probation WITHOUT a violation and then spending a heck of a lot more than 10 years in prison.