Background
The defendant pleaded guilty to sexual abuse of a minor in Indian Country and production of child pornography. The district court imposed a lifetime term of supervised release with a special condition prohibiting the possession or viewing of adult pornography. The court previously vacated a similar condition in 2025 for lack of findings, but the district court reimposed a narrowed version at resentencing, citing the defendant’s difficulty distinguishing ages online.
The court’s reasoning
The court reviewed the special condition for abuse of discretion. It concluded the condition lacked a rational basis because there was no evidence the defendant sought out adult pornography or that such material led to his criminal conduct. The court held that while the defendant had trouble discerning ages, the restriction on viewing adult pornography did not address the specific conduct of seeking online relationships with minors. The condition was not reasonably necessary to protect the public or deter crime, and it imposed a greater deprivation of liberty than required.
What it means going forward
The special condition prohibiting the viewing of adult pornography is vacated, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the court’s order.