United States v. Wheelock, No. 14-1504 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseDefendant pleaded guilty to child pornography and was sentenced as a repeat offender to a mandatory minimum of fifteen years imprisonment. The court rejected defendant's challenge to the district court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence obtained as a result of an administrative subpoena because defendant had no expectation of privacy in the subscriber information and a warrant was not necessary; neither federal nor Minnesota statutes warrant suppression; and the court rejected defendant's due process challenge to his sentence where the minimum sentence for receipt of child pornography is five years higher than the ten-year mandatory minimum 18 U.S.C. 2252(b)(2) imposes on the same offender for possession; and because knowing possession is not knowing receipt and each acts threatens distinct harms, the imposition of different mandatory minimums is not irrational. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Criminal Case - suppression and sentence. Use of administrative subpoena ordering Comcast to provide Internet Protocol address did not violate the Fourth Amendment. The third-party disclosure principle does not apply differently in the digital context. The Minnesota internet privacy statute does not create a reasonable expectation of privacy. Because Wheelock had no reasonable expectation of privacy in the subscriber information, a warrant was not necessary. Neither federal nor state statute warrants suppression. Imposition of fifteen-year mandatory minimum for repeat offenders does not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment by setting receipt of child pornography at a higher minimum that possession of child pornography. Receipt furthers the market whereas possession may not and may involve a mens rea for knowing receipt. The distinction in the minimums is not irrational.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.