A Depraved Act

The Indiana Supreme Court has ordered a suspension of not less than two years for a possession of child pornography conviction

In March 2022, Respondent was charged by grand jury indictment in the Northern District of Indiana with possession of child pornography involving a minor under the age of twelve. Respondent pled guilty as charged and was sentenced to twenty-four months of imprisonment, to be followed by three years of supervised release.

Respondent has been under an order of interim suspension since October 6, 2022, as a result of his conviction.

The court

Respondent’s crime was insidious. Although we do not have a fully developed evidentiary record before us because Respondent pled guilty in federal court and defaulted on these disciplinary proceedings, Respondent’s conviction for possession of pornographic materials involving a child under twelve years of age nonetheless reflects a panoply of harms inflicted on an extremely vulnerable victim. “[T]hose . . . who view and/or make available to others child pornography harm the individual children depicted in several ways: (1) by perpetuating the abuse initiated by the creator of the material; (2) by invading the child’s privacy; and (3) by providing an economic motive for producers of child pornography.” Brown v. State, 912 N.E.2d 881, 895 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (citing United States v. Norris, 159 F.3d 926 (5th Cir. 1998)). “[T]he materials produced are a permanent record of the children’s participation[.]” New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747, 759 (1982). Especially in the age of digital media, the harms child pornography victims suffer will often haunt them  for the rest of their lives.

An attorney who would commit such a depraved act cannot be entrusted with the responsibilities that accompany a license to practice law and, at a minimum, should be required to demonstrate his professional fitness before ever again practicing law in this state. The question before us, quite frankly, is whether Respondent should be afforded that opportunity.

Sanction

For Respondent’s professional misconduct, the Court suspends Respondent from the practice of law for a period of not less than two years, without automatic reinstatement, effective immediately.

Region News Source reported that he is a former deputy prosecutor and town judge. (Mike Frisch)