United States v. Rogers
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 12539
1st Cir.2014Background
- Brian K. Rogers was convicted of possession of child pornography; at least nine videos on his computer depicted the victim, "Vicky."
- The district court ordered Rogers to pay $3,150 in restitution to Vicky, representing estimated future therapy costs tied to her ongoing trauma from circulation of the images.
- The First Circuit initially affirmed both the conviction and the restitution order. See United States v. Rogers, 714 F.3d 82 (1st Cir. 2013).
- The Supreme Court granted certiorari, vacated, and remanded for reconsideration in light of Paroline v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 1710 (2014), which clarified causation principles for restitution in child‑pornography cases.
- On remand, the First Circuit reviewed the restitution order under Paroline, considering factors like other restitution awards to Vicky, Rogers’s viewing and possible sharing of images, number of images viewed, and whether losses were limited to the period Rogers viewed them.
- The First Circuit concluded the district court acted within its discretion and affirmed the $3,150 restitution award.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of conviction | Government: conviction stands; Paroline does not affect guilt. | Rogers did not contest that Paroline altered conviction standards. | Conviction affirmed (prior reasoning adopted). |
| Proper standard for restitution causation | Government: district court should follow Paroline’s framework to apportion losses. | Rogers: $3,150 does not satisfy Paroline’s causation requirements. | Court: Paroline applied; restitution award not an abuse of discretion. |
| Whether restitution award appropriately apportioned losses | Government: award based on limited-time continuing traffic, Vicky’s therapy needs, and other defendants’ contributions. | Rogers: award overstates his causal role given many offenders. | Court: district court considered Paroline factors (other defendants, reproduction/distribution, number of images, connection to production) and properly limited and apportioned losses. |
| Amount of restitution ($3,150) | Government: figure represents reasonable estimate (18 therapy sessions; conservative choice) | Rogers: amount insufficiently tied to his causal contribution. | Court: selection at low end of reasonable range; affirmed as within discretion. |
Key Cases Cited
- Paroline v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 1710 (2014) (framework for restitution causation and factors for apportioning losses in child‑pornography cases)
- United States v. Rogers, 714 F.3d 82 (1st Cir. 2013) (First Circuit’s prior opinion affirming conviction and restitution)
- Rogers v. United States, 134 S. Ct. 1933 (2014) (certiorari granted, judgment vacated and remanded for reconsideration in light of Paroline)
- United States v. Kearney, 672 F.3d 81 (1st Cir. 2012) (standard of review: restitution orders reviewed for abuse of discretion)