United States v. Frederick Stanley Hall, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that images that depict the vaginal or anal penetration of a prepubescent child by an adult male necessarily depict sadistic and masochistic conduct
• holding that images of an adult male vaginally or anally penetrating a young child are per se sadistic and do not require expert testimony “because such penetration would necessarily be painful”
• determining that the potential harm stemming from district court’s pre-trial eviden-tiary ruling under Fed. R. Evid. 404(b) was speculative because the defendant did not testify
• affirming a Free Speech Coalition conviction because “no reasonable jury could have found that the images were virtual children”
• commenting that Supreme Court “struck down as unconstitutional the words ‘or appears to be’ from the definition of child pornography 2 United States v. Wolford, No. 04-0578/AR contained in § 2256(8)(B) and the entire definition of child pornography in § 2256(8)(D)”
• affirming a Free Speech Coalition conviction because “no reasonable jury could have found that the images were virtual children”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).