Defendant’s child pornography conviction is affirmed where: 1) the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it showed the jury three short excerpts from three of the seventeen different videos at issue; 2) the district court did not err in allowing the jury to see the brief excerpt of the non-child pornography video found downloading as the search of defendant’s home occurred; and 3) an employee of the company that designed the file-sharing software used by defendant did not give improper expert testimony.
Read US v. Caldwell, No. 08-50804
Appellate Information
Filed October 26, 2009
Judges
Opinion by Judge Garwood
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
