United States v. Goldberg
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
491 F.3d 668 (2007)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Jeremy Goldberg (defendant), a 23-year-old convicted drug offender, downloaded and shared hundreds of sadistic, hardcore child-pornography images on a peer-to-peer network. Some of the images involved children as young as two. The federal government (plaintiff) charged Goldberg with knowing possession of child pornography. The federal sentencing guidelines range for Goldberg’s offense was 63 to 78 months. There was no statutory mandatory minimum sentence. The federal government requested a sentence enhancement based on the sadistic nature of some of the images. The district court deviated from the guidelines and imposed a sentence of one day in prison followed by 10 years of supervised release, during which time Goldberg would be required to undergo psychological treatment for his pedophilia. The district court stated that sentencing Goldberg to substantial prison time would ruin his life and that a lengthy supervised release would allow the court to monitor Goldberg while simultaneously allowing Goldberg to pursue his education, obtain a job, and get access to more extensive psychological services than those available in prison. The federal government appealed the sentence, arguing that it was an abuse of the court’s discretion.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 830,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.