People v. Hollins
Annotate this CaseDefendant, a man in his early thirties, had consensual sexual relations with a girl he knew was 17 years old. He took pictures of the activity with his cell phone. The pictures were found by the girl's mother, who complained to police, but who was initially told that the girl was too old to be considered a victim under the statutes concerning sexual abuse or sexual assault. Defendant was ultimately convicted under the child pornography statute, which set a higher age limit for the age (18) at which a teenager may legally consent to be photographed while engaged in sexual activity. The age of consent for sexual activity remains at 17. The appellate court affirmed. The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed, rejecting an argument that it was unfair to criminalize the photographing of a lawful activity and that this discrepancy was an as-applied denial of due process, equal protection, and the Illinois constitutional right to privacy. The court applied the rational basis test and found there to be a reasonable basis for the legislative decision.
Court Description:
This defendant was convicted of three counts of child pornography in a stipulated bench trial in Stephenson County, and he received three concurrent eight-year terms of imprisonment. The appellate court affirmed.
The events at issue here occurred in Freeport in 2008, when defendant Marshall Hollins, a man in his early thirties, had consensual sexual relations with a girl he knew was only 17 years old. He took pictures of the activity with his cell phone.
The pictures were found by the girl’s mother, who complained to police, but who was initially told that the girl was too old to be considered a victim under the statutes concerning sexual abuse or sexual assault. However, Hollins was ultimately charged under the child pornography provisions, which set a higher age limit for the age (18) at which a teenager may legally consent to be photographed while engaged in sexual activity. In 1985, the age of consent to be photographed pornographically was raised from 16 to 18, although the age of consent for sexual activity remained at 17.
On appeal, Hollins complained that it had been legal for him to have consensual sex with the girl and that, therefore, it was unfair to criminalize the photographing of what occurred. He asserted that this discrepancy was an as-applied denial of due process, equal protection, and the Illinois constitutional right to privacy. He did not claim that any fundamental right was implicated, and the supreme court, in this decision, applied the rational basis test. It found there to be a reasonable basis for the legislative choice which had been made and found no constitutional violation. The results below were affirmed.
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.