United States v. Robert Ellison

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that “even the receipt of [child pornography] for personal use, without more, keeps producers and distributors of this filth in business”
• finding that possessing child porn magazines was “relevant” to a prosecution for receipt of child porn videos because the acts were not “unrelated”—both acts “indicate[d]” the defendant’s “dangerous propensities in the realm of sexual exploitation of minors”
• “[E]ven the receipt of the prohibited materials for personal use, without more, keeps producers and distributors of this filth in business.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).