State v. Dalton

Last updated
State v. Dalton
Court Court of Appeals of Ohio
Full case nameThe State of Ohio, Appellee, v. Dalton, Appellant.
DecidedJuly 17, 2003 (2003-07-17)
Citation(s)153 Ohio App.3d 286
Court membership
Judges sittingCharles R. Petree II, William A. Klatt, J. Craig Wright [lower-alpha 1]
Case opinions
MajorityKlatt, joined by Petree, Wright
Keywords

State v. Dalton, 153 Ohio App.3d 286 (2003), is a legal case in the U.S. state of Ohio involving the prosecution of a man for recording fictional tales of alleged child pornography in a diary. The case received wide publicity because of the private nature of a diary and a novel application of state child pornography laws.[ citation needed ]

Contents

Background

In 1998, Brian Dalton was charged with possession of child pornography; he pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 18 months in prison. He was released after four months and received three years' probation. After violating his probation by failing to attend a sex offender treatment program, he was arrested. His mother then informed his probation officer that she had found questionable material in his apartment—a journal. Dalton's journal was retrieved; it contained graphic depictions of the torture and rape of children. Police determined the depictions were fictional. [1]

Dalton was charged with production and possession of child pornography. As part of a plea bargain, he pleaded guilty to one of the charges in July 2001. [1] He was sentenced to seven years in prison, in addition to the remaining time from the first case. Dalton then attempted to change his guilty plea, to pursue an appeal. The trial court denied his request.

Dalton, supported by the American Civil Liberties Union, charged that the Ohio child pornography statute was unconstitutional. Ohio law forbids the possession of all child pornographic materials, including writings, while the U.S. Supreme Court has generally held that only the possession of obscene photographic depictions of actual children may be outlawed. [2]

Ruling of the Court

In July 2003, the Court of Appeals of Ohio vacated the conviction and allowed Dalton to retract his guilty plea, accepting his argument that he would not have pleaded guilty had he received effective assistance from his court-appointed lawyer. The court did not speak to the constitutional issues.

In November 2003, the Ohio Supreme Court declined, by a 5–2 vote, to take the case on further appeal. [3] The case was sent back to trial court, and in March 2004, was dismissed. The trial judge held that "the charge did not meet the standard of the Ohio law that prosecutors used". [4]

Notes

  1. Retired Justice of the Ohio Supreme Court, sitting under appointment

Related Research Articles

Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973), was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court modifying its definition of obscenity from that of "utterly without socially redeeming value" to that which lacks "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value". It is now referred to as the three-prong standard or the Miller test.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Debra Lafave</span> American former teacher known for sexual battery against a teenager

Debra Jean Williams, better known under her former married name of Debra Lafave, is a convicted sex offender who formerly taught at Angelo L. Greco Middle School in Temple Terrace, Florida. In 2005, she pleaded guilty to lewd or lascivious battery against a teenager. The charges stemmed from a sexual encounter with a 14-year-old student in mid-2004. Lafave's plea bargain included no prison time, opting for three years of house arrest due to safety concerns, and seven years of probation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">PROTECT Act of 2003</span> United States law regarding child abuse and violent crimes against children

The PROTECT Act of 2003 is a United States law with the stated intent of preventing child abuse as well as investigating and prosecuting violent crimes against children. "PROTECT" is a contrived acronym which stands for "Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to end the Exploitation of Children Today".

<i>R v Butler</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

R v Butler, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 452 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on pornography and state censorship. In this case, the Court had to balance the right to freedom of expression under section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms with women's rights. The outcome has been described as a victory for anti-pornography feminism and the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund, but a loss for alternative sexualities.

<i>United States v. Extreme Associates, Inc.</i>

United States v. Extreme Associates, 431 F.3d 150, is a 2005 U.S. law case revolving around issues of obscenity. Extreme Associates, a pornography company owned by Rob Zicari and his wife Lizzy Borden, was prosecuted by the federal government for alleged distribution of obscenity across state lines. After several years of legal proceedings, the matter ended on March 11, 2009, with a plea agreement by Rob Zicari and Lizzy Borden.

Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union, 535 U.S. 564 (2002), followed by 542 U.S. 656 (2004), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court, ruling that the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) was unconstitutional as a violation of the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech.

Jason "Jace" Alexander is an American former television director and actor from New York City. In 2015, Alexander was arrested for the downloading and file sharing of child pornography, and later pled guilty to one count of promoting a sexual performance by a child and one count of possessing an obscene sexual performance by a child.

Child erotica is non-pornographic material relating to children that is used by any individuals for sexual purposes. It is a broader term than child pornography, incorporating material that may cause sexual arousal such as nonsexual images, books or magazines on children or pedophilia, toys, diaries, or clothes. Law enforcement investigators have found that child erotica is often collected by pedophiles and child sexual abuse offenders. Child erotica may be collected as a form of compulsive behavior and as a substitute for illegal child pornography and is often a form of evidence for criminal behavior.

Bradley Willman is an anti-pedophile activist from Canada who engaged in private investigations using the Internet to expose pedophiles. At one time, he had unfettered access to between 2,000 and 3,000 computers that had been used to visit websites of interest to pedophiles as the result of his use of a Trojan horse. Willman's actions helped put California Superior Court judge Ronald Kline in prison for more than two years in 2007 for possession of child pornography. However, the legality of Willman's use of the Trojan horse was a basis for appeal by the judge.

Morton Robert Berger is a former high school teacher from Phoenix, Arizona and a convicted child pornography collector. He was convicted in 2003 for possessing 20 pornographic images of children and sentenced to 200 years in prison without possibility of probation, parole, pardon or clemency. This sentence, which was the minimum available under Arizona law, was upheld by the Arizona Supreme Court in 2006. On February 26, 2007, the Supreme Court of the United States declined to hear a further appeal.

United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285 (2008), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that a federal statute prohibiting the "pandering" of child pornography did not violate the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, even if a person charged under the code did not in fact possess child pornography with which to trade.

Legal frameworks around fictional pornography depicting minors vary depending on country and nature of the material involved. Laws against production, distribution and consumption of child pornography generally separate images into three categories: real, pseudo, and virtual. Pseudo-photographic child pornography is produced by digitally manipulating non-sexual images of real children to create pornographic material. Virtual child pornography depicts purely-fictional characters. "Fictional pornography depicting minors", as covered in this article, includes these latter two categories, whose legalities vary by jurisdiction, and often differ with each other and with the legality of real child pornography.

An obscenity is any utterance or act that strongly offends the prevalent morality of the time. It is derived from the Latin obscēnus, obscaenus, "boding ill; disgusting; indecent", of uncertain etymology. The word can be used to indicate strong moral repugnance and outrage, in expressions such as "obscene profits" and "the obscenity of war". As a legal term, it usually refers to graphic depictions of people engaged in sexual and excretory activity, and related utterances of profane speech.

Child pornography laws in the United States specify that child pornography is illegal under federal law and in all states and is punishable by up to 20 years' imprisonment or a fine of $5000. The Supreme Court of the United States has found child pornography to be outside the protections of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Federal sentencing guidelines on child pornography differentiate between production, distribution, and purchasing/receiving, and also include variations in severity based on the age of the child involved in the materials, with significant increases in penalties when the offense involves a prepubescent child or a child under the age of 12. U.S. law distinguishes between pornographic images of an actual minor, realistic images that are not of an actual minor, and non-realistic images such as drawings. The latter two categories are legally protected unless found to be obscene, whereas the first does not require a finding of obscenity.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stan Romanek</span>

Stanley Tiger Romanek is an American author and alien abductee claimant.

United States obscenity law deals with the regulation or suppression of what is considered obscenity. In the United States, discussion of obscenity typically relates to pornography, as well as issues of freedom of speech and of the press, otherwise protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Issues of obscenity arise at federal and state levels. The States have a direct interest in public morality and have responsibility in relation to criminal law matters, including the punishment for the production and sale of obscene materials. State laws operate only within the jurisdiction of each state, and there are wide differences in such laws. The federal government is involved in the issue indirectly, by making it an offense to distribute obscene pornographic material depicting children through the mail, to broadcast them, as well as in relation to importation of such materials.

United States v. Handley, 564 F. Supp. 2d 996 (2008), was a court case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa involving obscenity charges stemming from the importation of manga featuring pornographic depictions of fictional minors.

The Vanderbilt rape case is a criminal case of sexual assault that occurred on June 23, 2013, in Nashville, Tennessee, in which four Vanderbilt University football players carried an unconscious 21-year-old female student into a dorm room, gang-raped and sodomized her, photographed and videotaped her, and one urinated on her face.

References

  1. 1 2 The Associated Press (2001-07-05). "Child-Sex Story in a Diary Brings a Prison Term" . The New York Times . Archived from the original on 2022-02-01. Retrieved 2022-04-04.
  2. "Ohio Appeals Court Overturns First-Ever Conviction for Writings in Private Diary". The American Civil Liberties Union. 2003-07-17. Archived from the original on 2021-04-13. Retrieved 2022-04-04.
  3. The Associated Press (2003-11-20). "Man who wrote of child sex, torture to get new trial". Archived from the original on 2004-12-15. Retrieved 2006-04-11.
  4. The Associated Press (2004-03-05). "Ohio judge dismisses case against obscene-journal writer". Archived from the original on 2006-07-26. Retrieved 2006-04-11.

Text of State v. Dalton is available from:  Findlaw    Leagle