CAAFlog
  • Home

CAAFlog

Recent ACCA Opinion: Gilbert

8/10/2020

 
United States v. Gilbert, No. ARMY 20190766, 2020 BL 294990 (A. Ct. Crim. App. July 31, 2020)​
Opinion here.

Appellant met a 13-year old girl (“MN”) online and asked her to send him nude photos. Although he never received the photos, he pled guilty to (1) attempt to possess child pornography; (2) sexual abuse of a child; and (3) possession of child pornography. On appeal, the ACCA considered whether asking a minor to send naked pictures of herself, and hoping the images contained sexually explicit conduct, satisfied the elements of attempted possession of child pornography. In a unanimous opinion, the ACCA found that it did not.[1]
 
Appellant’s Conduct Did Not Constitute a Substantial Step In Committing the Crime
 
To be convicted of attempted possession of child pornography, the solicited images must depict “sexually explicit conduct.”[2]

In this case, Appellant asked for a nude “selfie” of MN, but she declined.  She later suggested that she would send Appellant a photo of her clothed breasts.  Appellant replied that it would be “only fair” if he could see her naked.[3]
 
Since the conversation suggested that MN would be sending a nude photo of her breasts only, the military judge concluded that this image would not be “sexually explicit” within the meaning of the statute.  However, the military judge still ruled that Appellant took a “substantial step” toward committing the crime because he testified that he “hoped” MN would send him sexually explicit photos eventually.
 
The ACCA disagreed and held that Appellant’s “hope” that he would receive sexually explicit photos eventually was not a substantial step but only “preparation.”  Accordingly, the Court set aside the attempt conviction and remanded for a reassessment of his sentence.

[1] Judge Walker authored the majority opinion, which was joined by Judges Aldykiewicz and Salussolia.

[2] Sexually explicit conduct is “(a) sexual intercourse or sodomy; (b) bestiality; (c) masturbation; (d) sadomasochistic or masochistic abuse; or (e) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of any person.”

[3] Appellant previously had sent MN nude videos and photos of himself.

James Taglienti

Senior Intern

Brenner M. Fissell
8/10/2020 10:05:31 am

I think this was well reasoned. One quibble--"hope" is not "preparation" either. It bears on mens rea, not actus reus.

J.M.
8/10/2020 03:04:46 pm

I spent 3 years trying to teach staffs at JRTC and NTC that "hope is not preparation" without noticeable success.

A14 link
7/1/2021 04:20:38 am

Spot on with this write-up, I truly think this website needs much more consideration. I’ll probably be again to read much more, thanks for that info.


Comments are closed.
    Picture
    Picture
    Picture
    Links
    CAAF
    -Daily Journal
    -Current Term Opinions
    ACCA
    AFCCA
    CGCCA
    NMCCA
    Joint R. App. Pro.
    Global MJ Reform
    LOC Mil. Law
    Army Lawyer
    Resources

    Categories

    All
    Daily Journal
    MJ Reform
    Question Time
    Scholarship
    Top Of The Year 2021
    Unanimous
    Week In Review

    Archives

    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020

The views expressed on this website are expressed in the authors' personal capacities.
Proudly powered by Weebly
  • Home