DEFENDER SERVICES OFFICE
TRAINING DIVISION





SELECT TOPICS IN CRIMINAL DEFENSE > Common Offenses >
CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND OTHER SEX OFFENSES


BACKGROUND INFORMATION
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, BAIL, AND DISCOVERY
SENTENCING AND POTENTIAL COLLATERAL CONSEQUENCES
  • The Fine Print: Strategies for Avoiding Restrictive Conditions of Supervised Release 
    by Jennifer Gilg, Research & Writing Specialist, D. NE
    (This article sets forth the statutory framework governing supervised release, the types of conditions sex offenders typically face, and the arguments you can make to eliminate these conditions and give your clients a fighting chance to succeed after incarceration.)

  • Video: The Fine Print and Not Letting Clients Be Doomed to Sentencing Conditions: Avoiding Courts Imposing Restrictive Conditions During Supervised Release or Probation
    by Jennifer Gilg, Research & Writing Specialist, D. NE

  • BOP Program Statement on Sex Offender Programs (2/15/13) 
    (establishing procedures and guidelines for Sex Offender Treatment and Management Services in the Bureau of Prisons; see this Summary by Sentencing Resource Counsel for details on the program statement).
     


  • Restitution for Child Pornography Victims
    Prosecutors often seek restitution in child pornography cases on behalf of the victims. These victims are represented by private law firms that often submit requests for millions of dollars of restitution from multiple defendants. In Paroline v. United States, 134 S.Ct. 1710 (2014), the Supreme Court held that restitution is proper in child pornography cases "only to the extent the defendant's offense proximately caused a victim's losses."  While the decision rejects the contention that any one defendant is responsible for the entire loss amount, it does not set forth a precise test for determining what amount would be appropriate in a given case.  Instead, it offers "rough guideposts" to trial courts for ordering "restitution in an amount that comports with the defendant's relative role in the causal process that underlies the victim's general losses."

    On February 11, 2015, the Senate passed the Amy and Vicky Child Pornography Victim Restitution Improvement Act of 2015. It makes a defendant liable for “the full amount of the victim’s losses,” to include lifetime medical services, lifetime physical or occupational therapy, lifetime lost income, attorneys’ fees, as well as other costs. Where a single defendant is responsible for the harm, he or she would be responsible for the entire amount. Where multiple people are responsible for the harm, the court has two options in ordering restitution. It may order the entire restitution amount against each defendant, or may assess a prescribed amount for the offense of conviction—Production would call for $250,000, Distribution $150,000 and Possession $25,000. Defendants would be joint and severally liable and would have five years after the issuance of the restitution order to sue each other to recoup any excess costs assessed.



Back to top