Roger Pegram v. State of Iowa

How courts have described this case

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

• “[D]istributing child pornography through computers is particularly harmful because it can reach an almost limitless audience.”
• defendant presented “no argument as to why the evidence in question would unfairly prejudice him, other than the stigma associated with child molestation.”
• we take “a maximal view of the probative effect of the evidence and a minimal view of its unfairly prejudicial effect, and will hold that the district court erred only if the latter outweighs the former.”
• “an unpublished opinion . . . has no precedential value”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).