{"id":551,"date":"2017-10-27T11:11:50","date_gmt":"2017-10-27T16:11:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/?p=551"},"modified":"2018-06-12T12:48:02","modified_gmt":"2018-06-12T17:48:02","slug":"united-states-v-rock-2016","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/2017\/10\/27\/united-states-v-rock-2016\/","title":{"rendered":"United States v. Rock (D.C. Cir. 2017)"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"introduction-wrapper\">\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center\">United States v. Rock, 863 F.3d 827 (D.C. Cir. 2017)<\/h2>\n<p><strong>Nature of Case:\u00a0<\/strong>Appeal of a federal criminal sentence for\u00a0distribution of child pornography. Defendant-appellant raised several points of error on appeal, including two conditions that were imposed as a condition of his federal supervised release: (1) that he notify the United States Probation Office when he starts a new significant romantic relationship, as well as inform his romantic partner of his crime and (2) that he submit to penile\u00a0plethysmograph testing.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Holding:<\/strong>\u00a0Supervised release conditions vacated. Requirement that he notify USPO and romantic partner held void-for-vagueness and\u00a0plethysmograph testing found to be violative of due process.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center\"><em>Case Materials<\/em><\/h2>\n<ul class=\"default\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/10\/us-v-rock-opinion.pdf\">Circuit Court Opinion<\/a> | view via <a href=\"https:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=13105445706360033259&amp;q=863+F.3d+827+&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=4000003\">Google Scholar<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/10\/Appellants-Brief.pdf\">Appellant&#8217;s Brief<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/61\/2017\/10\/Appellees-Brief.pdf\">Appellee&#8217;s Brief<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: center\"><em>News and Related Materials<\/em><\/h2>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Criminal appeal, federal supervised release conditions related to physiological testing and notifying about new romantic relationships vacated<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/2017\/10\/27\/united-states-v-rock-2016\/\" class=\"more-link\">United States v. Rock (D.C. Cir. 2017)<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":242,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[22,21,20,17],"class_list":{"0":"post-551","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-sorn-cases","7":"tag-d-c-cir","8":"tag-plethysmograph","9":"tag-supervised-release","10":"tag-void-for-vagueness","11":"entry"},"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/551","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/242"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=551"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/551\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=551"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=551"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mitchellhamline.edu\/sex-offense-litigation-policy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=551"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}