United States v. DeFoggi, No. 15-1209 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseDefendant, the former acting director of cyber security at the United States Department of Health and Human Services, was convicted of multiple child pornography-related offenses following a jury trial. The court concluded that the district court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained through the interception of electronic communications where the application was properly authorized; the affidavit in support of the search warrant provided more than enough information to support a finding of probable cause to believe that evidence of criminal activity would be found at defendant's residence; the district court did not err in denying his motion to exclude evidence of his "fantasy chat messages" at trial where the court has previously held that personal chats on child pornography websites are admissible as circumstantial evidence; defendant failed to demonstrate that the chats were prejudicial; but defendant was improperly convicted of engaging in a child exploitation enterprise. Accordingly, the court vacated defendant's conviction on that count and remanded for resentencing. The court affirmed in all other respects.
Court Description: Kelly, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Beam, Circuit Judge] Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. The application to intercept defendant's electronic communications which was presented to the district court contained the required authorization documents, and the district court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress the intercepted communications; the affidavit offered in support of the search warrant application for defendant's home established probable cause to believe the search would find evidence of criminal activity; no error in admitting evidence of defendant's chat messages, as this court has previously held that personal chats on child pornography websites are admissible as circumstantial evidence associating defendant with the child pornography found on his computer; while the contents of the chats are shocking, defendant failed to establish that the the evidence was unfairly prejudicial, and it was properly admitted; evidence was insufficient to support defendant's conviction for engaging in a child exploitation enterprise in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2252A(g); evidence was sufficient to support defendant's convictions on four counts of accessing a means or facility of interstate commerce to view child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2252A(a)(5)(B); defendant requested an instruction that included the language he now challenges, and his objection is waived; defendant's conviction on Count I of the indictment is vacated and the matter is remanded for resentencing.
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.