United States v. Noel
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
581 F.3d 490 (2009)
- Written by Joe Cox, JD
Facts
Dick Noel (defendant) was charged with possession and production of child pornography. Noel cared for his stepbrother’s son, “H,” periodically from when the child was two years old. A search of Noel’s computer ultimately found photos of H nude and sleeping. Other images on the computer portrayed other minors in sexually explicit conduct. At trial, the government (plaintiff) called Jennifer Barnes, the police detective who had examined Noel’s computer. At trial, Barnes described how she found images on Noel’s computer that Barnes opined met the federal statutory definition of child pornography. Barnes testified about the objectionable photos and other nonpornographic photos the government had introduced as evidence. The prosecutor ultimately asked Barnes if the photos were pornographic under federal law, and Barnes answered in the affirmative. Noel was found guilty at trial. Noel appealed, arguing that Barnes had testified only as a lay witness and offered conclusory statements regarding the nature of the photographs without explaining her opinion. The government argued that Barnes was an expert witness and that her testimony was intended to establish that the government understood that the computer contained both legal and illegal photos and that Noel was being charged only with regard to the illegal photos.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kanne, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 798,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.