FC: Ohio conviction for fictional journal overturned

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Mon Jul 21 2003 - 08:38:27 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: Canadian police want photo ID to buy a cellphone"

    ---	
    
    Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 03:04:42 -0400
    To: declanat_private, politechat_private
    From: "Robert L. Ellis" <rellis@internet-attorneys.com>
    Subject: Ohio conviction for fictional journal overturned
    
    Previous:		:
    
    http://www.politechbot.com/p-02223.html
    http://www.politechbot.com/p-02326.html
    http://www.politechbot.com/p-02468.html
    http://www.politechbot.com/p-02223.html
    
    Declan:
    
    On Thursday, the 10th Ohio District Court of Appeals here in Columbus threw 
    out the guilty plea of Brian Dalton, who had been imprisoned a second time 
    for "pandering obscenity involving a minor."  Dalton's first conviction was 
    not a source of controversy:  He had pleaded guilty to five counts of 
    "pandering obscenity to a minor" and five counts of the slightly different 
    "pandering sexually-oriented material involving a minor."  After serving 
    about four months of his 18-month prison sentence, Dalton was released on 
    probation.  He was arrested for violating his probation by not showing up 
    for his sex offender treatment program.
    
    The controversy arose after Dalton was back in custody for probation 
    violation.  A probation officer (acting on a tip from Dalton's mother) went 
    to Dalton's home and found a 14-page handwritten journal involving 
    fictitious accounts of child molestation and torture.  Dalton was charged 
    yet again with "pandering obscenity involving a minor" based on his journal 
    writings.  Dalton pleaded guilty, but after realizing that this time he was 
    being convicted on the basis of a fictitious private journal, he tried to 
    withdraw the plea to challenge the constitutionality of his 
    conviction.  The trial judge refused to allow him to do so.  ACLU attorneys 
    intervened and asked the court to reconsider, which the court also refused 
    to do.  The ACLU then helped Dalton appeal.  Although the ACLU had argued 
    for dismissal primarily on First Amendment grounds and secondarily on 
    procedural grounds, the appeals court based its decision solely on 
    procedural grounds, namely that Dalton's guilty plea was invalid due to 
    ineffective assistance of counsel.
    
    http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/documents/10/2003/2003-ohio-3813.doc
    
    - Bob Ellis
    
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    Like Politech? Make a donation here: http://www.politechbot.com/donate/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Jul 21 2003 - 08:46:37 PDT