United States v. Edwin E. Wiegand

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that posed photographs of nude fourteen-year-old girl in various supine and sitting positions and of nude ten-year-old sitting on the beach constituted a “lascivious exhibition of the genitals”
• recognizing that “[i]n the protection of children otherwise privileged expressions may be affected”
• noting that “ l[l]ascivious’ is no different in its meaning than ‘lewd’ ”
• finding that “lasciviousness is not a characteristic of the child photographed but of the exhibition which the photographer sets up for an audience that consists of himself or likeminded pedophiles”
• listing factors for determining whether a photo contains a “lascivious exhibition” constituting child pornography for purposes of Article 134, UCMJ
• noting that “[t]he question of whether the pictures fall within the statutory definition is a question of fact as to which we must uphold the district court’s findings unless clearly erroneous,” but that “[t]he definition of ‘lascivious’ is a matter of law which we review de novo”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).