## Facts

- Christopher S. Handley, an Iowa collector, received and possessed Japanese anime/manga depicting sexually explicit conduct involving fictional minors.
- A superseding federal indictment charged Handley with:
  - receipt and possession of obscene visual depictions of the sexual abuse of children under 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a) and (b);
  - mailing obscene matter under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1461, 2; and
  - forfeiture.
- The indictment targeted drawings/cartoons depicting minors (or persons appearing to be minors) engaged in specified sexual conduct and alleged the depictions were obscene and/or lacked serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
- Handley moved to dismiss the § 1466A obscenity counts, arguing that because the materials were drawings depicting no real children, his private receipt and possession were protected speech under the First Amendment.
- The court considered the facial constitutionality of portions of § 1466A on a motion to dismiss.

## Issues

1. Whether 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(2) and (b)(2), which criminalize certain depictions of minors in graphic sexual conduct based on lack of serious value without requiring full Miller obscenity or real-child involvement, are facially overbroad under the First Amendment.
2. Whether prosecutions under 18 U.S.C. § 1466A(a)(1) and (b)(1) must require a trier-of-fact determination of obscenity under the Miller test.

## Decision

- The court granted the motion to dismiss in part and denied it in part.
- The court held § 1466A(a)(2) and (b)(2) unconstitutional on their face because they restrict protected speech without requiring obscenity.
- The court permitted prosecution under § 1466A(a)(1) and (b)(1) to proceed, but only with obscenity determined by the trier of fact under the Miller standard.
- The court rejected a facial challenge to § 1466A in its entirety and severed the unconstitutional subsections from enforcement in the case.

## Legal Principles

- When no real children are depicted, the government may not criminalize depictions of minors in sexual conduct unless the material is obscene under Miller v. California.
- A statute criminalizing “virtual” depictions of minors that do not require either (1) real-child involvement (Ferber category) or (2) obscenity (Miller category) is facially overbroad under the First Amendment.
- Obscenity is determined by the trier of fact applying the full Miller test, including contemporary community standards and whether the work lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
- Provisions that punish depictions based solely on specified sexual content and lack of serious value, without the remaining Miller elements, reach protected expression and are unconstitutional.

## Conclusion

The court held that § 1466A(a)(2) and (b)(2) impermissibly criminalize protected expression involving fictional minors and are facially overbroad, while § 1466A(a)(1) and (b)(1) remain enforceable only as traditional obscenity prohibitions requiring a jury (or other factfinder) to apply the Miller test.


United States v. Handley, 564 F. Supp. 2d 996 (S.D. Iowa 2008)