United States v. Bateman

805 F. Supp. 1045, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16392, 1992 WL 309827
CourtDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire
DecidedSeptember 23, 1992
DocketCrim. No. 92-62-01-D
StatusPublished

This text of 805 F. Supp. 1045 (United States v. Bateman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Bateman, 805 F. Supp. 1045, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16392, 1992 WL 309827 (D.N.H. 1992).

Opinion

ORDER

FUSTE, District Judge, Sitting by Designation.

We have before us defendant’s motion to consolidate counts, filed on September 15, 1992, Docket Document No. 30. The motion was the object of informal argument [1046]*1046at the status conference held on September 21, 1992. The motion requests that the government be required to consolidate and reduce its selected units of prosecution with regard to Counts 2 through 21, and 22 through 37, or a total of 37 counts, to four counts. The defendant reasons that, although the government has charged thirty-seven counts of transportation of prohibited materials in Counts 2 through 37, the affidavit in support of the search warrant that led to the seizure of the prohibited materials indicates that there were three or possibly four shipments of the material. “Just as it would be prosecutorial harassment to prosecute a person for separate crimes of bigamy for each day a bigamist lives with two wives ..., so too would it be harassment to charge a separate count for each frame of an illegal film, and, by analogy, to charge a separate count for each item contained in an alleged simultaneous shipment.” Motion, Docket Document No. 30, at 2.

The defendant claims that the indictment is multiplicitous, charging a single offense in different counts, with the risk of multiple sentences for a single offense, or otherwise suggest to the jury that the defendant committed several crimes. United States v. Downing, 850 F.2d 1104, 1108 n. 4 (6th Cir.1988), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1025, 110 S.Ct. 732, 107 L.Ed.2d 751 (1990); United States v. Dixon, 921 F.2d 194, 196 (8th Cir.1990); United States v. Marquardt, 786 F.2d 771, 778 (7th Cir.1986).

Originally, the government’s position, announced at the status conference, was to the effect that charging several items of prohibited material in a specific count may obscure the specific charge; that it may violate the defendant’s constitutional right to notice of the specific charges against him, and that it may prevent the jury from separately deciding guilt or innocence with respect to each particular alleged offense conduct, thus leading to uncertainty as to whether the defendant’s conviction was based on items of prohibited material or on items which do not qualify as prohibited materials. The government assured the court that the independent counts were filed to avoid notice and duplicity problems. U.S. v. Duncan, 850 F.2d 1104, 1108 n. 4 (6th Cir.1988).

On September 22, 1992, the government entered its formal written response to the motion. After its participation in the September 21,1992 status conference, the government acknowledged that there is authority for the position set forth by the defendant. United States v. Cipollone, 951 F.2d 1057 (9th Cir.1991); United States v. Gallardo, 915 F.2d 149 (5th Cir.1990); United States v. Meyer, 602 F.Supp. 1480 (S.D.Cal.1985).1 Prompted by the contents of the government’s written response, a telephone conference was held on September 22, 1992. The matter was further discussed and the government agreed that the best course of action was to consent to the granting of defendant’s motion to consolidate counts. The consolidation will reduce the counts to four, as follows:

COUNT ONE
In or about December 1990, in the District of New Hampshire and elsewhere, defendant
LARRY LANE BATEMAN
knowingly shipped in interstate commerce visual depictions of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct, to wit, Polaroid type photographs, the production of which visual depictions involved the use of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. [1047]*1047In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2252(a)(1).
COUNT TWO
Between on or about April of 1990 and December of 1990, in the District of New Hampshire and elsewhere, defendant
LARRY LANE BATEMAN
knowingly shipped in interstate commerce visual depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, in “picture books” and video cassettes, as set forth and labeled below, the production of such visual depictions involved the use of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct:
PICTURE BOOKS: “Goodbye Frustration”; and “Teen”; and “Physique Pictorial”; and “The Yearning That Won’t Go Away”; and “Hot Stuff Between The Covers”; and “Art”; and “Boys Hard Dicks”; and “Like em Young, Like em Hot, Like em Homey”; and “Tempt’n Teens”; and “Teen Cocks”; and “Men Together with Bad Bad Boys”; and “Chicken”; and “Try This One On For Size”; and “Young Hard-ons Delivered”; and “A Complete Selection of Kids!”; and “So Rare and Available To So New ..and “Teens”; and “Boy’s School”; and “All American Boys We Want Your Body”; and “You Will Never Be The Same”; and
VIDEO CASSETTES: “Young QTS 1”; and “Young QTS 2”; and “Lads 4”; and “Young QTS 3”; and “Teens 2”; and “Beauties 9”; and “Lads 1”; and “Lads 3”; and “Dolls”; and “Lads 5”; and “Teens and 2”; and “Teens 3”; and “Teens and 1”; and “SLP 5”; and “Full 3”; and “Exotic”; and “Teens 6”. In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2252(a)(1).
COUNT THREE
In the course of committing the felony offenses alleged in Counts One and Two of the Indictment pertaining to visual depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct, defendant
LARRY LANE BATEMAN
used or intended to be used to commit or to promote the commission of said offenses certain property, namely:
a. Six (6) boxes of blank video cassette tapes;
b. One (1) Ricoh 35mm camera No. 47138052 with case;
c. One (1) Apple monitor No. 519382876 with printer No. 0176605 with (6) boxes floppy discs;
d. One (1) Apple IIC computer No. 519382876 (keyboard);
e. One (1) Turbo Mouse No. 3911329;
f. A large quantity of VCR connector cables;
g. One (1) Macintosh SE Superdrive No. F1029A8VB01 with keyboard No. AP04020VM0312;
h. Fifteen (15) user guides for computers;
i. One (1) Land camera No. 5193876 with case and one (1) film package;
j. Two (2) folders of manuals for computers;
k. One (1) Panasonic VHS camera model AC-190 No. B2HB02562;
l. One (1) Panasonic video AC adaptor AC-BG No. B202582YD;

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Stirone v. United States
361 U.S. 212 (Supreme Court, 1960)
United States v. Miller
471 U.S. 130 (Supreme Court, 1985)
United States v. Debbe Marquardt
786 F.2d 771 (Seventh Circuit, 1986)
United States v. Garry David Gallardo
915 F.2d 149 (Fifth Circuit, 1990)
United States v. John Anthony Cipollone
951 F.2d 1057 (Ninth Circuit, 1991)
United States v. Meyer
602 F. Supp. 1480 (S.D. California, 1985)
Johnston v. Acting Commissioner of Social Security
493 U.S. 1026 (Supreme Court, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
805 F. Supp. 1045, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16392, 1992 WL 309827, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-bateman-nhd-1992.