Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
United States v. Guivas-Soto
Citations: 39 F. Supp. 3d 206; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116759; 2014 WL 4100756Docket: Criminal No. 14-080 (FAB)
Court: District Court, D. Puerto Rico; August 21, 2014; Federal District Court
Defendant Jose Hector Guivas-Soto was indicted on January 30, 2014, for transporting a minor for prostitution and sex trafficking of children. He filed a motion to compel the production of discovery, specifically requesting surveillance videos from Lips strip club, which the government had seized. During a pretrial conference, the defense argued that the videos do not contain pornography and requested an in-camera inspection by the Court. The Court reviewed the videos and determined that clips numbered 60, 61, 62, 69, 72, and 74 depict child pornography, as defined under 18 U.S.C. 2256, and thus the government is not required to provide the defense with copies. The definition of child pornography includes any visual depiction involving a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. The Court found that the videos show a fifteen-year-old female, referred to as O.M.V., performing sexually explicit acts at the strip club, including giving lap dances and engaging in simulated sexual intercourse. The interactions included suggestive movements, physical contact, and acts that meet the statutory definitions of sexually explicit conduct under 18 U.S.C. 2256. As a result, the government is excused from providing duplicate copies of these clips to the defense, in accordance with federal law regarding child pornography. The Court determined that the videos in question depict sexually explicit conduct, specifically falling under the categories of simulated sexual intercourse and lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area, as defined by 18 U.S.C. § 2256. Since the videos involve a minor in sexually explicit conduct, they qualify as child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2256(8). Consequently, the government is not required to provide copies of the video clips to defense counsel but must make the material reasonably accessible to the defendant. The Court reinforced that the government agreed to fulfill specific requests outlined in paragraphs IIA-E. In evaluating whether behavior constitutes a "lascivious exhibition," courts consider several factors, as established in United States v. Dost, 636 F.Supp. 828 (S.D.Cal.1986). The videos are deemed a "lascivious exhibition" due to: (1) their sexually suggestive setting in a strip club's private back room; (2) the minor's unnatural posing, straddling a client's crotch; (3) her inappropriate and provocative attire; and (4) the implication of sexual coyness and willingness to engage in sexual activity.