No. 19-428
Ryan Courtade v. United States
Tags: 18-usc-2252 18-usc-2256 appellate-review child-pornography child-pornography-statute circuit-split due-process lascivious-exhibition standard-of-review statutory-interpretation subjective-intent
Latest Conference:
2020-01-10
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. When reviewing a district court's conclusion that an image depicts a "lascivious exhibition" under 18 U.S.C. 2256(2)(A), must the appellate court review that conclusion de novo or for clear error?
2. When determining whether an image depicts "a lascivious exhibition" under 18 U.S.C. 2256(2)(A), may a court consider the subjective intent or motive of either the defendant or the person who created the video, or must the court focus on the objective content of the exhibition itself?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
When reviewing a district court's conclusion that an image depicts a 'lascivious exhibition' under 18 U.S.C. 2256(2)(A), must the appellate court review that conclusion de novo or for clear error?
Docket Entries
2020-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.
2019-12-16
Reply of petitioner Ryan Courtade filed.
2019-12-02
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2019-10-25
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 2, 2019.
2019-10-24
Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 31, 2019 to December 2, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-10-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 31, 2019)
Attorneys
Ryan Courtade
Gregory M. Lipper — Clinton & Peed, Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent