Before summarizing this case, it should be noted that the statute at issue carries a 15-year minimum mandatory sentence. This is a fact not mentioned in the opinion.
In United States v. Cox, --- F.3d ---, No. 18-10416 (9th Cir. 2020), the defendant sent a one-to-one electronic message linking to a Dropbox account that
contained child pornography. The message containing the link read, “[g]oodies
for daddy.”
She was charged with and convicted of, among other crimes, violating 18 U.S.C.
§ 2251(d)(1)(A).
As relevant, it provides: "Any person who . . . knowingly
makes, prints, or publishes, or causes to be
made, printed, or published, any notice or
advertisement seeking or offering . . . (A) to receive, exchange, buy, produce,
display, distribute, or reproduce, any
visual depiction, if the production of such
visual depiction involves the use of a
minor engaging in sexually explicit
conduct and such visual depiction is of
such conduct[.]"
On appeal, the defendant argued the statute contemplated something other than direct, one-to-one communications. The Court rejected that argument holding that the single message to one other person supported the conviction: "we
hold that one-to-one communications can satisfy the
“notice” requirement under 18 U.S.C. § 2251(d)(1)."
