CASE LAW UPDATE: Whether juvenile defendant violated child pornography statute with another teen?
Juvenile teen defendant engaged in sexting with another juvenile teen 2 years his junior. He was found guilty of possession of child pornography as a result. Juvenile defendant appealed. On appeal, he argued that (1) the evidence was insufficient to adjudicate him delinquent because the child pornography statute does not criminalize voluntary teen sexting; and (2) the child pornography statute, as applied to teenage couples engaging in voluntary sexting, violates fundamental due process rights. The Minnesota Court of Appeals (1) held that the evidence was sufficient under the plain language of the child pornography statute; and (2) declined to address the due process challenge because juvenile defendant did not raise the issue in the trial court.
In re N.R.C.A., A20-1352, Itasca County.
Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.