United States v. Morgan Chase Woods

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the scienter requirement “eliminates the possibility that an unwitting downloader of child pornography” would be convicted
• explaining that the defend- ant’s vagueness challenge failed because he knowingly “down- loaded child pornography to both” of his computers, which “clearly” established possession of the child pornography
• rejecting defendant’s claim of multiplicity where “[n]othing in the indictment indicated that the same images underlying the receipt count underlie the possession counts”
• “Accordingly, charges in an indictment are not multiplicitous if the charges differ by even a single element or alleged fact.” (emphasis added)
• explaining that Miranda applies only to custodial interrogations
• “Relevant evidence may be excluded if it is inadmissible hearsay.” (citing Fed. R. Evid. 802)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).