Winn v. Chateau Cantrell Apartment Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that jury was authorized to conclude that the children depicted in videos were clearly prepubescent and the State therefore met its burden of proving the children were under the age of 18
• appellant argued that “the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt his knowledge of the ages of the children depicted in the movies”
• appellant argued that “the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt his knowledge of the ages of the children depicted in the movies”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).