CO: State Supreme Court bars multiple convictions based on quantity of pornographic images

[coloradopolitics.com –  12/14/20]

The Colorado Supreme Court has clarified that no matter how many pornographic images an individual possesses, sexual exploitation of a child merits a single charge, which prosecutors had derogatorily deemed a “volume discount on child pornography.”

Following the decision, multiple state legislators agreed that the guidelines for prosecuting the crime should spark a conversation given the court’s interpretation.

“What does justice look like for child pornography, be it one image or 10 images or 1,000 images?” asked Sen. Rhonda Fields, D-Aurora. “All I have to say is it all has the same damage.”

Read the full article

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

13 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Go Colorado!

If the Prosecutors had it their way, every offense committed could be broken down into multiple “mini “ offenses.
Say you went out and broke 40 windows. They could then say the limit was 5 windows. So they could charge you with 8 different crimes, which could land you in Prison for years, all for breaking windows?
What the court said is already in place in Santa Clara county ( I don’t know about other counties) any amount of obscene material retrieved at one time is counted as one offense. The amount retrieved is what determines how severe the offense is, as well as the eventual sentence handed down.

Doesn’t matter if it’s one count or 5 counts. It’s ONE and DONE once charged, tried and convicted + registry = living death.

Have 2 convictions 1 arrest.Ny

The USSC addressed this issue a long time ago. Multiplicity (multiple counts of the same offense based on the same transaction) is unconstitutional. While counts can be charged and prosecuted individually, they must merge into ONE conviction if the evidence shows they are all a part of the same transaction. For example, if someone steals $10,000, the DA can (and usually will) charge and prosecute 10 charges of $1000 each. But if convicted of all counts, they all merge into one – one conviction, one sentence.

DAs just want to add as many charges as they can to fluff their resumes and pad their conviction statistics – it’s no more complicated than that.

IL: Here is another similar case just over the southern border from me.
https://www.mystateline.com/news/local-news/judge-sends-south-beloit-child-pornographer-to-prison-for-26-years/

Ill just bet there were some duplicitous charges ( as discussed in this posted case) among this guys wrongdoing too. Prosecutors love duplication because of the exposure to lengthy sentencing limits increases a likelihood or chance of plea.

How many of them have naked pictures of their children or grandchildren? Ones of them being brought into the world as a naked baby, on the toilet, and having their first bath. Wouldn’t those images be pornographic? So they are offenders too!!

Sounds logical 1bust 1court case 1conviction the registery in California must be growing out of control because their trying hard to shrink IML down to only new and teir3 offenders.
It’s been along road iv been dealing with this bullshiit since high school I was 17 when my wife/victim became pregnant with our first born.
2 days after I turned 18 the DA filed charges at the request of social worker who we met at the Social Services office when trying get medical for her.
A detective showed up at my house talk to me and my Mother and informed us I had a court date on calendar involving this case and if I didn’t show up there be A weren’t for my arrest when i went to court the judge released me on my own reconsince i never spent A day in jail.
At 19 I ended up taken a plea deal i was a new father and just wanted too get on with my life little did I know by taken that deal I wasn’t getting on with my life I was ending it.

Good luck