Jacobson V. United States

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 1790
  • Published : March 22, 2001
Open Document
Text Preview
Jacobson v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
1992. 503 U.S. 540, 112 S.Ct. 1535.

FACTS= On September 24, 1987, Keith Jacobson was indicted on charges of violating a provision of the Child Protection Act of 1984, which criminalizes the knowing receipt through mail of a "visual depiction [that] involves the use of minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct." On Feb 1984 Jacobson ordered two magazines in the mail of young boys. The magazines entitled Bare Boys 1 and Bare Boys 2, contained material of nude young boys from preteen to teens. Jacobson claimed that he want to order material of 18 year olds and up. However Jacobson's receipt of the magazines was legal under both federal and Nebraska laws. Laws were constructed three months after the order was filled that banned all sexual depictions of children. Soon after the Gov. started setting up Jacobson by sending him applications to phony organizations that were illegally based. PROCEDURAL HISTORY= This was brought to the state court were Jacobson was found guilty and then after exhausting the state level he appealed to supreme court of the United States. ISSUE= The issue involving this case is during the time Jacobson purchased the magazines they were legal. The government directed Jacobson into many different phony organizations to trap him into guilt. The jury must decide whether Mr. Jacobson willingly participated in illegal activities or was just involved by being duped by the government. HOLDING= The government showed that the defendant was predisposed to engage in illegal conduct. He received the photos, and was predisposed to willingly break the law to do so. He was found guilty because they do not have to show that he intended to break the law only that he received illegal material of minors. JUDGMENT= The jury upheld the decision. Jacobson was again found guilty. REASONING= "The statue violated here,... does not require proof of specific intent to break the...
tracking img