Matter of Belfi v. Gene B.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that those provisions apply to individuals who “attempt[] to produce child pornography by communicating with only an adult intermediary”
• holding that knowing receipt requires a belief that the materials received contain child pornography
• holding that the defendant’s description of “how many photographs he wanted of each girl” and “how he wanted the girls to pose” contributed to the reasonableness of the jury’s finding that he intended to use the minors for the production of child pornography
• explaining that the terms No. 22-1156 7 “employs” or “uses” in § 2251(a) do not “contemplate[] direct interaction with a minor aimed at oral persuasion”
• holding that the defendant’s concern that an online person the defendant intends to have sex with is part of a sting operation supports a relevant inference of guilt because “a relationship with . . . an adult[ ] would not have concerned law enforcement”
• explaining that, to support a conviction for attempted production of child pornography under § 2251(a), the government must prove “that [defendant] intentionally attempted to use [the minors] to produce child pornography”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).