Child Pornography Possession Pornographic Works

cassiejohnson//November 13, 2015//

Listen to this article

Appellant challenged his seven sentences for possession of pornographic works involving minors. He contended that the double-jeopardy prohibition against multiple prosecutions and the statutory protection afforded by Minn. Stat. § 609.04 prohibit his convictions of seven counts of possession of child pornography when the offenses involved continuous possession of a single computer. Alternatively, he argued that Minn. Stat. § 609.035, subd. 1, limited his punishment because his conduct arose from a single behavioral incident. The Court of Appeals held that each individual image depicting child pornography and stored on a computer drive is a separate pornographic work under the plain language of Minn. Stat. § 617.247, subd. 4(a). Affirmed.

A14-2057 State v. Bakken (Polk County)

Click here for full text