United States v. Reingold
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
731 F.3d 204 (2013)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Corey Reingold (defendant), a 19-year-old man, downloaded and distributed hundreds of images of child pornography through a peer-to-peer file sharing service. Reingold also admitted to sexually molesting his prepubescent sister on three separate occasions, one of which occurred after Reingold turned 18. The federal government (plaintiff) charged Reingold with distributing child pornography, a federal crime carrying a minimum sentence of five years, or 60 months. Reingold pleaded guilty. Prior to sentencing, the federal government raised two sentence-enhancement factors: (1) that Reingold had a pattern of sexually abusing his prepubescent sister; and (2) that Reingold used a computer to distribute child pornography. The federal government recommended a sentence of 168 to 210 months in prison. Instead, the district court sentenced Reingold to 30 months in prison, holding that applying the mandatory minimum sentence to Reingold would be cruel and unusual punishment because Reingold was extremely immature and would benefit more from rehabilitation than a lengthy prison sentence. The district court also declined to apply either sentence-enhancement factor, holding that (1) the enhancement for sexually abusing minors only applied to adults and Reingold was either a minor or an immature 18-year-old when he molested his sister; and (2) enhancing Reingold’s sentence because he used a computer would be double counting. The federal government appealed, arguing that the district court erred by refusing to apply the mandatory minimum sentence.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Raggi, 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.