10-2968 U.S. v. Adams

Listen to this article

Sentencing
Child pornography

A sentencing judge’s statement that the defendant charged with trafficking in child pornography may have an uncontrollable illness is not a procedural error.

“The judge first mentioned the word ‘illness’ in his discussion of the seriousness of the crime and Adams’ likelihood of recidivism. There is nothing in the record to suggest the judge was making a finding of mental illness. Instead, he was struggling with the severity of the crime and wondering why anyone would choose to view images like those that Adams had viewed. The judge surmised that such a desire was so unreasonable that perhaps it was beyond a person’s control.”

“Moreover, immediately after these comments, the judge said that he may need to ‘back off’ on that belief because Adams had apparently controlled his desires since 2007. The judge then explicitly stated that if his only consideration were Adams’ likelihood of recidivism, he would be more responsive to Adams’ requested five-year sentence. Thus, the judge’s initial discussion of an attraction to child pornography as an ‘illness’ did not dictate the ultimate sentence.”
Affirmed.

10-2968 U.S. v. Adams

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, McDade, J., Evans, J.

Full Text