United States v. Ganoe

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the admission of child pornography images was not error because the images “were highly probative of the state of mind with which the files were received and possessed”
• observing that the district court “is not required to scrub the trial clean of all evidence that may have an emotional impact” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• affirming admission of child pornography videos where district court limited the government to playing only a few seconds of several video clips
• reasoning that a defendant’s “decision to install and use file-sharing software, thereby opening his computer to anyone else with the same freely available program . . . failed to demonstrate an expectation of privacy that society is prepared to accept as rea- sonable”
• affirming conviction where court limited prosecution to 10 very short video clips
• individual has no legitimate expectation of privacy in computer files he made acces- sible to others

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).