Background
Defendant Brent Hooton appealed his sentence after pleading guilty to production and distribution of child pornography. He challenged several conditions of supervised release that would apply after his thirty-two-year prison term.
The court’s reasoning
The court applied plain error review to conditions the defendant failed to object to below. It held that conditions restricting proximity to children were grammatically limited to places primarily used by children and thus not overbroad. However, the court found a condition prohibiting possession of materials depicting sexually explicit conduct involving adults was overbroad because it swept too broadly to include non-pornographic depictions of adults. The court also found the condition vague because it could prohibit possession of materials necessary for collateral attacks or sex offender treatment.
What it means going forward
The decision requires the district court to amend the supervised release conditions to exclude lawful possession of materials depicting adult sexual conduct and to clarify that the restriction does not apply to materials used for legal challenges or treatment.