United States v. Robert Shultz
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 21485
| 6th Cir. | 2013Background
- Shultz downloaded hundreds of child-pornography images and dozens of videos over 3–4 years, using file-sharing to make some files available for others.
- He pled guilty in 2010 to receiving and possessing child pornography and was sentenced to 171 months in prison followed by lifetime supervised release with special conditions.
- On appeal after re-sentencing, the district court again imposed lifetime supervised release with twelve conditions, including condition four (contact with children) and condition six (prohibition on possessing material for deviant sexual arousal).
- The district court noted the danger to children given the scope of his collection, violent/sexual content, and his prior assault convictions; the court acted with a view toward rehabilitation and public protection.
- This court affirms the district court’s conditions as reasonable and not an abuse of discretion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of condition four restricting contact with children | Shultz argues condition four violates the statutory limits, non-delegation, and constitutional rights | The government contends the condition is reasonably related to §3583(d) and necessary for public safety and rehabilitation | Condition four upheld; not plain error; reasonable under §3583(d) |
| Validity of condition six restricting possession of deviant sexual-arousal material | Shultz argues vagueness and First Amendment overbreadth | Condition six is narrowly tailored to exclude material intended to arouse sexual interest in children and relates to rehabilitation | Condition six affirmed; narrowed interpretation to avoid vagueness; not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Tapia v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2382 (2011) (upholding consideration of rehabilitation in sentencing; limits on punishment growth for rehabilitation)
- United States v. Alexander, 509 F.3d 253 (6th Cir. 2007) (deference to district court in setting supervised-release conditions)
- United States v. Poynter, 495 F.3d 349 (6th Cir. 2007) (transcript-based review of sentencing decisions; no abuse of discretion)
- United States v. Zobel, 696 F.3d 558 (6th Cir. 2012) (upholding near-location restrictions for supervised release)
- United States v. Kerr, 472 F.3d 517 (8th Cir. 2006) (courts may uphold strict conditions to protect public from sexual offenders)
- United States v. Stults, 575 F.3d 834 (8th Cir. 2009) (discussion of supervision conditions and non-delegation concerns)
- United States v. Nixon, 664 F.3d 624 (6th Cir. 2011) (limits on First Amendment challenges to supervision conditions; relation to rehabilitation and public safety)
- United States v. Simons, 614 F.3d 475 (8th Cir. 2010) (upholding conditions affecting rights when tied to rehabilitation and public protection)