United States v. Darran Lohse

How courts have described this case

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

• rejecting defendant’s claim that § 2251(a) requires “either active participation by the minor or active sexual conduct to an unconscious minor by an adult defendant”
• jury could find that the defendant “quite literally used [a sleeping child] as a sexual object”
• jury could find that the defendant “quite literally used [a sleeping child] as a sexual object”
• “In determining whether an image is lascivious, we have cited with approval the factors set forth in [Dost].”
• “[The defendant] quite literally used [the sleeping victim] as a sexual object in orchestrating the nine photographs. This is not a case of mere presence.” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)
• court rejected the argument that the federal creation of child pornography statute 15 No. 1-24-0291 required either active participation by the minor or active sexual conduct to an unconscious minor by an adult defendant

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).