A California state appeals court overturned a Milpitas, CA man’s conviction Wednesday saying that he should not have been convicted of child pornography after he was found guilty of superimposing images of his 13-year-old daughter’s face onto bodies of women engaged in sexual behavior.
Why? The pictures did not show actual minors engaging in sexual activity nor simulating sex acts, which are the elements needed in California to carry out a conviction of child porn, punishable by up to three years in prison.
The Sixth District Court of Appeal in San Jose, CA said that the child porn ban was to prevent children from being exploited and by interpreting it too broadly and applying it to virtual child porn could violate the constitutional standard the U.S. Supreme Court established in 2002 when it struck down a federal law prohibiting computer-generated graphic images of a sexual nature.
It was concluded in a 3-0 ruling that possession of altered images, virtual child pornography, remains protected by the First Amendment.
The man was convicted in 2009 of possessing child pornography and supplying his daughter with marijuana and cocaine. He was sentenced to 13 years and four months in prison.
The court overturned two of the man’s three drug convictions because the trial judge allegedly instructed jurors on the wrong law. Prosecutors will be able to retry those counts as well as Wednesday’s appeal ruling to the state Supreme Court.
Virtual child pornography, also known as “barely legal” porn has become one of the Internet’s newest trends. The images feature children’s heads on the bodies of adults over the age of 18 or adults that resemble someone under age and legislation has had a difficult time deciphering what lies on the border of reality and fantasy. With the rise of the Internet and emerging technological advancements, circulation of virtual child pornography has take the shape of e-mails, fantasy games and even social networking services. The Internet social world, Second Life features “ageplay,” where people can engage in sexual activity with child avatars, which has brought an on slew of child pornography legal and moral dilemmas. The issue of “ageplay” and virtual child porn has resulted in numerous child pornography charges which have created a necessity for legislation to better define the laws of virtual reality.
It seems the law is in a continuous combat with technology and its progression. The Internet cannot ever be entirely restricted to the laws of a particular state or even country has. For now, virtual child pornography has not been found to be a link to the sexual abuse of children. In the state of Florida, for a conviction of possession of child pornography to stick, there must be real children involved. In virtual child porn cases it has yet to be found that victims are created through its production.
If you have been charged with possession of child pornography in relation to computer-generated images anywhere in the state of Florida, contact the Florida Sex Crimes Defense Lawyers online or call us toll-free at 1-866-608-5LAW (5529).
Great customer service. I was always kept updated on every new detail throughout my whole case. The staff made me feel very comfortable and confident in choosing their services. Highly recommend. Cory Barone
Send us an email using the form below.
Boca Raton Consultation Location:Whittel & Melton, LLC
3700 Airport Rd., Suite 401
Boca Raton, FL 33432
Naples Consultation Location:Whittel & Melton, LLC
2390 Tamiami Trail North, Suite 102
Naples, FL 34103
Tampa/St. Petersburg Consultation Location:Whittel & Melton, LLC
200 Central Ave., Suite 400
Tampa, FL 33629
Spring Hill Consultation Location:Whittel & Melton, LLC
11020 Northcliffe Blvd
Spring Hill, FL 34608
Gainesville Consultation Location:Whittel & Melton, LLC
2441 NW 43rd Street
Gainesville, FL 32606
Toll Free Florida Statewide:Whittel & Melton, LLC
The information on this Florida Sex Crimes Attorneys & Lawyers / Law Firm website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this or associated pages, documents, comments, answers, emails, or other communications should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information on this website is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing of this information does not constitute an attorney-client relationship.