United States v. Specialist DANA P. BLOUIN
2014 CCA LEXIS 330
| A.C.C.A. | 2014Background
- Appellant, a Specialist in the U.S. Army, was court-martialed for possession of child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2256(8) and Article 134, UCMJ.
- Stipulated facts showed about 633 images of suspected child pornography on his digital media, with roughly 173 likely under the statute’s definition.
- Of the 173 likely images, the government offered 12 as a sample; the providence inquiry was reopened to address these.
- Three images were ultimately found to constitute child pornography, and appellant pleaded guilty to the charge and its specification.
- The images depicted underage girls in sexually provocative poses with focus on the genital or pubic region; some images were clothed.
- The military judge relied on Knox to hold that nudity is not required to prove a lascivious exhibition; appellant’s plea and admissions supported conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether nudity is required to constitute a lascivious exhibition under the statute. | Blouin argues nudity is required. | Knox totality of circumstances governs; nudity not required. | Nudity not required; totality of circumstances governs. |
| Whether the three images meet the definition of child pornography under Knox/Roderick. | Images may be clothed and not meet the definition. | Images show lascivious focus on genitals despite clothing. | Images constitute lascivious exhibition of minors’ genitals or pubic area. |
| Whether Warner affects the validity of adopting Knox for this case. | Warner undermines Knox’s applicability. | Warner does not repudiate Knox’s framework. | Warner does not affect Knox’s totality-of-circumstances approach. |
Key Cases Cited
- Knox v. United States, 32 F.3d 733 (3d Cir. 1994) (establishes totality of circumstances for lascivious exhibition and absence of nudity requirement)
- United States v. Roderick, 62 M.J. 425 (C.A.A.F. 2006) (adopts Knox approach to Dost factors; tests for lascivious exhibition)
- United States v. Warner, 73 M.J. 1 (C.A.A.F. 2013) (addressed fair notice; does not overrule Knox framework)
- United States v. Inabinette, 66 M.J. 320 (C.A.A.F. 2008) (noting standard for affirming guilty findings)