<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>CRIMINAL JURISDICTION &#187; Child Abuse Crimes Lawyer</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/category/child-abuse-crimes-lawyer/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog</link>
	<description>CRIMINAL JURISDICTION: Criminal Law Blog by Defense Lawyer John Floyd and Mr. Billy Sinclair</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 01:44:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>TEXAS’ APPROACH TO TEEN SEXTING</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/10/09/texas%e2%80%99-approch-to-teen-sexting/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/10/09/texas%e2%80%99-approch-to-teen-sexting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Oct 2011 16:28:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child Abuse Crimes Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hardcore child pornographer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sex offender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=661</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[States Reevaluating Criminalization of Juvenile Cyber-Sex

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

This past legislative session Texas joined the ranks of a small number of states which have reduced criminalization “teen sexting.” Gov. Rick Perry signed the law this past June which is designed to, according to Wireupdate, “prevent teenagers from sexting without subjecting them to serious criminal penalties that have life-long consequences.” Before this latest legislation became law on September 1st teenagers could have faced the more serious felony charge of “promotion of child pornography” which, upon conviction, would have resulted in lifetime registration as a “sex offender.”]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/10/09/texas%e2%80%99-approch-to-teen-sexting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>18 U.S.C. § 2559: U.S. APPELLATE COURTS IN CONFLICT OVER CHILD PORNOGRAPHY RESTITUTION ISSUES</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/09/23/18-u-s-c-%c2%a7-2559-u-s-apellate-courts-in-conflict-over-child-pornography-restitution-issues/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/09/23/18-u-s-c-%c2%a7-2559-u-s-apellate-courts-in-conflict-over-child-pornography-restitution-issues/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2011 21:44:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child Abuse Crimes Lawyer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=656</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Difficulty Establishing Restitution Child Pornography Cases

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

In two previous posts (here and here), we discussed the increasing trend of victims of child pornography seeking restitution damages under 18 U.S.C. § 2259 against defendants who were convicted of possessing child pornography depicting their images.  These restitution requests have triggered significant conflicts in the federal courts of appeals, most notably between the Fifth and Second Circuits. On September 8, 2011, the Second Circuit, in United States v. Aumais, reinforced the reasoning it expressed in its August 18, 2011 decision, United States v. Marino; specifically, that these victims must demonstrate a “proximate cause” between a defendant’s possession of the pornographic images and any “harm” suffered by the individual.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/09/23/18-u-s-c-%c2%a7-2559-u-s-apellate-courts-in-conflict-over-child-pornography-restitution-issues/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IMPACT OF CRIME VICTIMS RESTITUTION ACTS</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/09/18/impact-of-crime-victims-restitution-acts/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/09/18/impact-of-crime-victims-restitution-acts/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Sep 2011 20:07:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child Abuse Crimes Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child abuse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[crime restitution]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[restitution damages]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=654</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fifth Circuit’s Decision on Restitution in Possession of Child Pornography Cases Creates Sentencing Nightmare

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

In theory the criminal justice system has a fundamental obligation to provide restitution to crime victims. In practice this obligation has created a contentious and ongoing legal debate in federal appellate courts as to how this obligation must be met. Two recent decisions emanating out of the Fifth and Second federal circuits underscore the difficulties faced in deciding when and how restitution is appropriate, the level of harm caused to victims, and the statutory standards by which restitution can be awarded. Last year we dealt with the issue of restitution in child pornography cases which, we believe, has run constitutionally amuck (here). We feel it’s time to examine both the legislative history, and the statutory application, of crime victims’ restitution acts, both of which were discussed at some length by the Second Circuit on August 18, 2011 in United States v. Marino.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/09/18/impact-of-crime-victims-restitution-acts/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>INTRODUCING EVIDENCE OF PRIOR FALSE ALLEGATIONS</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/08/16/introducing-evidence-of-prior-false-allegations/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/08/16/introducing-evidence-of-prior-false-allegations/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2011 21:31:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child Abuse Crimes Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child sexual assault]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prior false abuse allegations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexual abuse]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=637</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Confronting Witnesses with Prior False Allegations to Support Theory of Bias, Motive or Interest

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

One of the most devastating crimes that can happen to anyone is to be falsely accused of having sexually assaulted a child. A significant number of potential jurors in child sexual assault cases readily admit in jury selection, voir dire, that they do not believe a child would “make up” a story about being abused. But we know it happens (here, here, and here). Children lie about sexual abuse for an endless assortment of reasons: mom told them to do it in bitter divorce custody disputes; they want to “get even” with a relative who was responsible for them being disciplined; they want to be removed from a household, especially in foster care, in which there are a lot of behavioral restrictions; they are emotionally unstable or mentally ill.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/08/16/introducing-evidence-of-prior-false-allegations/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>NINTH CIRCUIT EXPANDS BORDER SEARCH INLAND</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/05/11/ninth-circuit-expands-border-search-inland/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/05/11/ninth-circuit-expands-border-search-inland/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 May 2011 07:13:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child Abuse Crimes Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[border search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child pornogaphy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child sexual misconduct]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illegal search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sex offender]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=593</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Extended Border Search Doctrine: Suspicionless Searches of Computers and Cameras Need not be Conducted at Time and Place of Entry

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

It was a case of “first impression” for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals—the case of United States v. Howard Cotterman, a repeat sex offender who was arrested at a “border stop” in Lukeville, Arizona in April of 2007. Cotterman, and his wife Maureen, tried to reenter the United States from Mexico at Lukeville. Both had valid U.S. passports. As part of border reentry protocol, an inspector ran a check of the passports through Border and Custom Protection. This routine check produced a Treasury Enforcement Communication System alert on Howard Cotterman’s name—an alert which had been placed in the system by U.S. Immigration and Customs enforcement. The alert stemmed from Cotterman’s 1992 convictions in Long Beach, California for illegal sexual misconduct with a child and child sexual molestation. The ICE alert instructed border inspectors to be on the “lookout” for child pornography.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/05/11/ninth-circuit-expands-border-search-inland/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>OVERZEALOUS FEDERAL PROSECUTION FOR PRODUCTION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY REVERSED</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/03/26/overzealous-federal-prosecution-for-production-of-child-pornography-reversed/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/03/26/overzealous-federal-prosecution-for-production-of-child-pornography-reversed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Mar 2011 15:05:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child Abuse Crimes Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child pornography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child sex crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child sexual assault]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexual abuse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexual explicit conduct]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=564</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You would think that an Assistant U.S. Attorney, charged with prosecuting offenses against the laws the United States, would understand the laws upon which he elects to indict a criminal defendant. But far too often federal prosecutors, especially in “child sex cases,” are more concerned with securing convictions to “notch” the handle on their legal resume than in pursuing justice as they are legally and ethically required to do. Such was the apparent motive for the 2009 prosecution of a petty “voyeur,” Allen Steen, in federal court in Odessa, Texas under the child pornography law, 18 U.S.C. 2551(a)—a statute which carries a mandatory minimum of 15 years upon conviction.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/03/26/overzealous-federal-prosecution-for-production-of-child-pornography-reversed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>EXCESSIVE FINES-PROPERTY FORFEITURE IN CHILD PORNOGRAPHY CASES</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/01/16/excessive-fines-property-forfeiture-in-child-pornography-cases/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/01/16/excessive-fines-property-forfeiture-in-child-pornography-cases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Jan 2011 10:02:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child Abuse Crimes Lawyer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=531</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Courts Stretch Logic and Allow Government Land Grab in Child Porn Case

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

Former President George W. Bush appointed more than 200 judges to the federal bench. The Ivy League graduate and former Texas governor had a two-part litmus test for federal judgeship appointments: the appointees had to be young and ideologically conservative. While Bush made a number of “diverse” appointments, the “overall number of minority judges in the federal courts did not increase during his tenure,” said Jennifer Segal Diascro, professor of government at American University’s School of Public Affairs.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2011/01/16/excessive-fines-property-forfeiture-in-child-pornography-cases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DEFENDING AGAINST JUROR BIAS IN SEX CRIMES</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2010/12/16/defending-against-juror-bias-in-sex-crimes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2010/12/16/defending-against-juror-bias-in-sex-crimes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2010 11:03:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child Abuse Crimes Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child indecency]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child molester]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[juror bias]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sex crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexual assault]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[voir dire]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=519</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Voir Dire, Inability to Consider Full Range of Punishment: Proper Objection and Practice to Preserve Error for Appeal

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

Sex offenses involving children are beyond a doubt the most difficult to defend, particularly when the allegations appear compelling and the witnesses are believable (here, here, and here).  These kinds of sexual assault allegations are easy to indict and even easier to prosecute. All the prosecution needs is the victim’s testimony to secure and sustain a conviction. These offenses are difficult to defend because potential jurors enter the trial setting with a predisposed bias against anyone charged with a sex offense against a child. While the defense counsel tries to exclude these biased jurors from the jury, either through peremptory challenges or challenges for cause, too many effectively conceal their bias in order to serve and convict. These jurors want to be part of a process that convicts the insidious “child molester.”]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2010/12/16/defending-against-juror-bias-in-sex-crimes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>THE CONSTITUTIONAL QUICKSAND OF JESSICAS LAW IN TEXAS</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2010/11/18/the-constitutional-quicksand-of-jessicas-law-in-texas/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2010/11/18/the-constitutional-quicksand-of-jessicas-law-in-texas/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Nov 2010 10:29:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child Abuse Crimes Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child rape]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child sexual abuse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jessica’s Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ngo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexual abuse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexual assault]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=506</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Texas Penal Code 21.02, Continuing Sexual Abuse of a Child, Thwarts Long Established Requirement of Unanimous Verdicts

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

It’s been called arguably the second “most serious offense” in the State of Texas: Texas Penal Code 21.02, The Continuous Sexual Abuse of a Child. The statute provides that a person commits the continuous sexual abuse of a child if (1) during a period that is 30 or more days in duration, the person commits two or more acts of sexual abuse, regardless of whether the acts of sexual abuse are committed against one or more victims, and (2) at the time of the commission of each of the acts of sexual abuse, the actor is 17 years of age or older and the victim is a child younger than 14 years of age. This law was enacted by the Legislature is 2007 and was part of Texas’ version of Jessica’s Law. These laws have met with serious constitutional challenges across the country.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2010/11/18/the-constitutional-quicksand-of-jessicas-law-in-texas/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>SEXUAL ASSAULT DEFENSES SEVERELY RESTRICTED</title>
		<link>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2010/11/04/sexual-assault-defenses-severely-restricted/</link>
		<comments>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2010/11/04/sexual-assault-defenses-severely-restricted/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Nov 2010 21:40:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>johntfloyd</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Child Abuse Crimes Lawyer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child sex crime]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child sexual abuse]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[child sexual assault]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexual assault]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexually molested]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/?p=502</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Extraneous Offenses: The Impact of Bass on Admissibility of other Crimes, Wrongs and Bad Acts.

By: Houston Criminal Lawyer John Floyd and Paralegal Billy Sinclair

We wrote about the Curtis Bass case last year (here). We will restate the facts of the Bass case here to illustrate the profound effect the case has had on defending sexual assault cases, particularly those involving child victims.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.johntfloyd.com/blog/2010/11/04/sexual-assault-defenses-severely-restricted/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

