D.C. Circuit

The Federal Docket

United States v. Hillie (D.C. Cir. September 2021)

The D.C. Circuit reversed the defendant’s convictions for sexual exploitation of a minor, attempted sexual exploitation of a minor, and possession of an image of a minor engaged in sexual conduct. The defendant had surreptitiously filmed his minor stepdaughters while they were changing in their rooms or in their bathrooms, but this evidence was insufficient to convict him of the charges because there was no evidence that the images depicted the “lascivious exhibition” of the minors because the minors were not exhibiting their nudity in a “lustful manner that connotes the commission of sexual intercourse” or other overtly sexual conduct.

United States v. Johnson (D.C. Cir. July 13, 2021)

The D.C. Circuit held that a defendant’s right against doubly jeopardy was violated where he was convicted of both unlawful receipt or possession of a firearm or destructive device and unlawful making of a firearm, as these counts were multiplicitous.

United States v. Samira Jabr (D.C. Cir., July 9, 2021)

The D.C. Circuit affirmed a defendant’s conviction for unlawfully attempting to enter the White House or its grounds, though the defendant had mistakenly tried to enter the U.S. Treasury building. Upon appeal from the defendant’s bench trial, the Court held that the district court had jurisdiction because the information charged a violation of a federal statute, even if the specific facts alleged did not constitute an actual violation. Additionally, the Court held that the district court did not err in amending the information to find the defendant guilty of attempt despite the information not listing this theory of conviction.

United States v. Alicia Norman

United States v. Alicia Norman, et al, No. 17-3070 (D.C.C. June 11, 2019) ISSUES: Criminal Procedure, Pleas, Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, Sentencing Guidelines On an appeal from a bribery and marijuana distribution case, the Court rejected the defendants’ numerous allegations of error except to the extent it held that one of the defendant’s had raised […]

Scroll to Top