October 19, 2007 Ninth Circuit Opinions
On Oct. 19, 2007, the Ninth Circuit issued two published decision:
In U.S. v. Soltero, the Ninth Circuit partially affirmed Soltero’s sentence and remanded for a change in some details. The Court held the district court's failure to determine whether Soltero had reviewed the presentence report was error, but harmless here where Soltero did not state he had not reviewed it, and did not identify any detail therein he disputed. The Court also affirmed the requirement that Soltero pay for his drug treatment while on supervised release, with the parole officer given discretion to determine his ability to pay, and with the requirement that Soltero not associate with the “Delhi Street Gang.” However, requirements that he use his “true legal name” which prevent him from using the surname Soltero, his step-father’s name, was order rephrased to require him to use Soltero. The requirement that, while on supervised release, he not asociate with “any known member of any . . . disruptive group” was impermissibly vague.
In US. v. Salcio, where the defendant appeals his conviction for possession of child pornography, the Ninth Circuit avoiding making a determination whether a jury may determine, based solely on the images themselves, whether images depict minors. There was sufficient other evidence, including a detective’s testimony that he recognized and interviewed one of the child victims depicted in the images, and including defendants admissions that he sought out child pornography, to support the jury’s conclusion that the images were of a minor.
