Hi, How Can We Help You?

Category Archives: 38C Furnishing Harmful or Obscene Materials to a Minor

State v. Mr. D (DMC No. 14909) – Felony Custodial Interference, Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor, Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation, and Felony Sending Obscene Internet Materials to a Minor – Reduced to Probation With 90 Days of Jail – Yuma County Superior Court (Case No. CR2017-00299): Mr. R was a school teacher at the local high school and he was 32 years of age. He befriended a 17-year-old student at the high school while he was the sponsor of the chess team. She was constantly with Mr. R, and eventually she went on a three-day vacation with him to an out-of-state location. The student eventually told her friend that there had been some fondling, digital penetration and exchange of some lewd photographs via the Internet. The girl’s friend told the other girl’s boyfriend, and teachers were notified.
Mr. R was ultimately charged with Felony Custodial Interference for taking the minor out of state. He was also charged with Felony Luring a Minor for Sex Exploitation when he requested photographs from her on the Internet. Lastly, he was charged with Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor and also charged for sending obscene Internet materials to her. If he were to be convicted of all charges and sentenced to the maximum, he could have spent well over a decade in prison. Ultimately, the case was handled by a local Yuma attorney along with our Firm, and was reduced to Probation with 90 days in Jail and Sex Offender Registration.

State v. Mr. S (DMC No. 14796) – Felony Sexual Exploitation of a Minor/Child Pornography (DCAC), Felony Aggravated Luring of a Minor for Sexual Exploitation (DCAC) and Felony Transmitting Obscene Materials to a Minor – Dismissed – Surprise Police Department Investigated (SW14-0802800) and Maricopa County Superior Court (Case No. PF2015-138656).

Mr. S was a 29-year old financial advisor who was licensed by FINRA. He was alleged to have started an online conversation of a sexual nature with his wife’s friend’s daughter who was 14. The allegations were that he solicited naked photographs from her and she sent five pictures to him. In addition, allegations were made that there were three naked videos of them that were sent back and forth. Ultimately, the girl entered a psychiatric hospital because she was suicidal. She was also a “cutter” and she claimed she had been raped by her cousin. The Surprise Police Department then executed a Search Warrant, seized all of Mr. S’s computers and arrested him.

We became involved in the case immediately after Mr. S was released from custody. While the forensic analysis of the computers and iPhones were pending, we handled the case for 11 months and gathered evidence to show that the girl had a history of lying and making things up. Ultimately, Detectives phoned and said they would be arresting Mr. S, and we arranged a self-surrender at the Surprise Police Department. Once he was taken into custody, we then handled the Initial Appearance. We successfully argued to the Judge that there was no Probable Cause for the Aggravated Luring charge, or the Sexual Exploitation of a Minor charge, due to the fact that the photographs and videos never showed any faces, and it was impossible to determine whether the ages were below 18-years of age. However, Probable Cause was found for 1 Count of Furnishing Obscene Materials to a Minor.

Next, we contacted the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office and spoke with the Deputy County Attorney handling the case. We informed her that the problems on the other two cases also applied to the remaining charge. Ultimately, she agreed with us and she “turned down” the case for prosecution. All charges were ultimately Dismissed, and the Surprise Detectives were not happy about this. After these charges were Dismissed, somebody purporting to be the alleged victim contacted Mr. S on social media in order to gain “closure.” We suspected that this was Undercover Detectives attempting to secure some type of admission from Mr. S. No admissions were ever made, and no charges were ever brought against Mr. S.

Originally, he was facing potentially over three decades in prison if he were to be convicted on all three charges run consecutively. He has no criminal record and has preserved his FINRA license.

Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Purposes, Felony Sexual Exploitation of a Minor/Child Pornography, & Felony Furnishing Harmful or Obscene Materials to a Minor Not Charged – State v. Mr. T (DMC No. 13971) (South Carolina Sheriff’s Office Investigated):  Mr. T was on the website “Plenty of Fish” and had conversations with numerous women who were 18 years of age and older.  He received a call from somebody purporting to be a Deputy from the South Carolina Sherriff’s Office claiming that he had gotten a call from an under aged girl’s father stating that Mr. T had sent photos of his penis to her.  Mr. T denied this and the Detective indicated that he was lying.  The Detective also indicated that Mr. T had spoken to the victim’s father, who had called him.

In reality, Mr. T had spoken to some girls who stated they were over the age of 18.  Two of them had sent him unsolicited photos of themselves naked.  When we got involved, we began contacting the South Carolina Sherriff’s Office and they had never heard of the Deputy who had contacted Mr. T. Through more investigation, we had discovered that this was an ongoing scam, conducted by scammers who would pose as women and send naked photos to men all over the country, then shake them down for financial payments with the threat of prosecution.  If Mr. T were actually charged with these crimes and convicted, he could have spent well over 20 years in prison.  Because we exposed this as a scam fairly quickly, he did not end up sending the “ransom money” that had been requested of him.  No charges were ever brought, and he has no blemish on his record.

(3 Counts) Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Purposes (Dangerous Crimes Against Children), Felony Tampering with Evidence, Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor (DCAC) & Felony Furnishing Obscene Material to a Minor Reduced to 3 Counts with 10 Years in Prison – State v Mr. G (DMC No. 12843) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2014-001975):

Mr. G was a 61 year old teacher at a local elementary school who was accused by another teacher of being “too close” to one of his 14 year old students.  An investigation ensued in which the 14 year old stated that she had sexual intercourse with Mr. G on a couple of occasions.  They had sent sexually explicit photos and text back and forth on her cell phone. Mr. G admittedto everything involved with the cell phones and photos, but he did not agree that he had sex with the victim.  Ultimately a Psycho Sexual Risk Evaluation was conducted and Mitigation materials were put together for the prosecutor.  An offer of 10 to 15 years was received and Mr. G entered into that plea.  At sentencing, the court agreed that he deserved the lowest amount of time under the plea agreement (10 years in prison). He originally was facing the rest of his life in prison.

(4 Counts) Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation (Dangerous Crimes Against Children), (3 Counts) Felony Sexual Exploitation of a Minor) (DCAC) & (4 Counts) Felony Furnishing Harmful or Obscene Materials to a Minor Reduced to 4 Amended Counts with 10 Years in Prison – State v. Mr. B (DMC No. 13767) (Santa Cruz Superior Court CR-15-136):

Mr. B was a teacher at an elementary school in which he had an 8thgrade female student.  The student began receiving threatening texts from other students who were cyber-bullying her.  This resulted in the police becoming involved and analyzing her phone.  During their investigation, they found text messages which were inappropriate between Mr. B and the victim.  There were also nude photographs which had been exchanged.

A search warrant was executed on Mr. B’s phone and at his house the next day.  He was interviewed and admitted to exchanging nude photographs with the victim. He immediately submitted his resignation and surrendered to law enforcement.  Because the victim was 13 years of age, and he was 27 years of age and in a position of authority (i.e. her teacher), he was charged with 11 felonies, which could have resulted in him spending the rest of his life in prison. After conducting a Psycho-Sexual Risk Evaluation which showed him to be an alcoholic, (in which he was drunk when he participated this crime), we were able to show that he was a low risk to re-offend if sober.  An offer was obtained which allowed the judge to sentence him as high as 12 years, but instead he was sentenced to only 10 years.  Because the charges were reduced, he has the chance to only do 8.5 years of that time if he behaves well in prison.  When he gets out, he will still have another 50 plus years of his life ahead of him as a free man.

Felony Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation, (5 Counts) Felony Sexual Conduct with a Minor and (1 Count) Felony Furnishing Harmful or Obscene Items to Minor Reduced to Child Abuse with Probation and 60 Days in Jail – State v. Mr. M (DMC No. 12417) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2014-119425):

Mr. M was employed as a Detention Officer at a local prison for the Arizona Department of Corrections. He had met a young woman at the State Fair who claimed to be 17 years old almost turning 18.  He started a physical relationship with her and an internet relationship with her where she would send him nude photographs at his request. The young woman turned out to be 15 years of age, which compounded difficulty in Mr. M’s case.  If she had stated she was 18 years of age, but was actually 15 years of age or older, he would have had a defense to the charges. Because she had started the relationship stating she was 17, he did not have that particular defense available. However, we were able to show that he was not a threat to his own minor children.  Therefore, he was allowed to have contact with his minor children while on probation, and he did not have to register as a sex offender.  He was also allowed to have computer access during the course of his probation.

REDUCED | 7 COUNTS of SEXUAL MISCONDUCT with a MINOR and 1 COUNT of FURNISHING HARMFUL or OBSCENE MATERIALS to a MINOR REDUCED to PROBATION with ZERO DAYS in JAIL – State v. Mr. T. (DMC No. 9519) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2009-174270): Mr. T. was a 34 year old male who began a sexual relationship with his 17 year old cousin. While they were in a hotel parking lot, police made contact with him and began questioning him as to why he was in the area. They ultimately discovered that the two of them had engaged in sexual conduct inside of the motel. They also later discovered through interviews that this had happened on numerous occasions and that pornography had also been shared between the two of them. Mr. T. was ultimately charged with 7 counts of Sexual Conduct with a Minor pursuant to Arizona Revised Statute 13-1405 and 1 count of Furnishing Harmful Obscene Materials to a Minor under Arizona Revised Statute 13-3506. Because of the questionable nature of the stop we were able to convince the prosecutor to extend the plea which included a small amount of Probation and zero days in jail. This was a very advantageous plea given the fact that Mr. T. was 21 years older than his cousin.

REDUCED | 2 COUNTS of CHILD PORNOGRAPHY/4 COUNTS of FURNISHING OBSCENE MATERIALS to a MINOR REDUCED to PROBATION with ZERO DAYS JAIL – State v. Mr. C. (DMC No. 4292) (Maricopa County Superior Court CR2003-036856): Mr. C. was going through a nasty child custody battle when his baby’s mother accused him of molesting their 2 year old daughter.  There was no evidence of any molest, and charges were not brought regarding Sexual Conduct with a Minor.  However, charges were brought that Mr. C. had allegedly distributed pornography to a teenage male who lived in the same apartment complex.  Also, there were allegations of child pornography on his computer.  We were able to have the case reduced to a single count of furnishing harmful or obscene materials to a minor with probation and zero days jail.  Originally Mr. C. could have been facing 20 years minimum in prison on just the 2 counts of child pornography.

NOT CHARGED (ALL) | 4 COUNTS of CHILD PORNOGRAPHY (DCAC)/INDECENT EXPOSURE/FURNISHING OBSCENE MATERIALS to a MINOR and PUBLIC DISPLAY of EXPLICIT SEXUAL MATERIAL ALL NOT CHARGED– State v. Mr. R. (DMC No. 10213) (Avondale Police Department Investigated): Mr. R. was a maintenance worker who was observed by another maintenance worker staring out the window touching himself through his pants.  It was alleged that there were children outside the window that he was looking at them at the time. He was initially arrested for “indecent exposure”, but then other maintenance workers said Mr. R. kept a duffle bag at the stop that had child pornography inside of it.  There were images of underage naked girls inside that duffle bag.  When police went to interview neighbors, one neighbor had heard rumors that he had shown pornographic images to children as young as 7 in the neighborhood.  We became involved in the case and sat down with Detectives as they interviewed Mr. R.  Mr. R. denied owning the duffle bag, nor exposing himself or showing explicit photos to children.  Police fingerprinted the photographs and could not find any prints of Mr. R. on the photos.  Detectives were convinced to inactivate the case and did not file persuaded with the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office.  Mr. R. would have been facing a minimum of 40 years in prison if convicted.

NOT CHARGED | FURNISHING PORNOGRAPHY TO A MINOR (DMC No. 2967) State v. Mr. S.: Mr. S. was having a BBQ at his house with a woman he used to date. Various 10 year old boys were also at the BBQ. As he was pulling up a video game site for the kids, some photos came up from pornographic websites. The woman saw this, and reported it to the police approximately 2 months later, after their relationship had fallen apart. We were able to sit down with the Detective and explain this was inadvertent on our client’s part. In addition, we spoke with the prosecutor at the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, who agreed to “turn down” the charges. Mr. S.’s computer was then returned to him from police evidence. Had Mr. S. been charged with these allegations, he would have faced lifetime registration as a sex offender.

Call Now Button