AGGRAVATED FELONY - CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
United States v. Williams, No. 06-694, 128 S.Ct. 1830 (May 19, 2008) (finding constitutional a statute criminalizing, in certain specified circumstances, the pandering or solicitation of child pornography, rejecting claims the statute was overbroad under the First Amendment and impermissibly vague under the Due Process Clause because the term "simulated sexual intercourse" might include virtual child pornography or sex between youthful-looking adult actors).

Lower Courts of Second Circuit

CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
Gonzalez v. Ashcroft, 369 F.Supp.2d 442 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 29, 2005) (New York conviction for "use of a child in a sexual performance" under New York Penal Law § 263.05, did not constitute an offense relating to child pornography, and was therefore not an aggravated felony under INA § 101(a)(43)(I), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(I), because the statute of conviction permits convictions for a lesser degree of scienter when parents or guardians are charged with violating the statute than the federal statutes listed in the aggravated felony provisions require, i.e., to act intentionally or knowingly: "Unless the scienter element is read so as not to attach to the parents knowledge of the nature of the performance, the clause regarding parents is rendered superfluous.").

Third Circuit

AGGRAVATED FELONY - SEXUAL ABUSE OF A MINOR -AGGRAVATED CRIMINAL SEXUAL CONTACT
Restrepo v. Attorney General, 617 F.3d 787 (3d Cir. Aug. 16, 2010) (New Jersey violation of New Jersey Statute 2C:14-2(2), aggravated criminal sexual contact, with a victim between at least thirteen years of age, but less than sixteen years of age, is categorically an aggravated felony sexual abuse of a minor offense for immigration purposes).

Fifth Circuit

AGGRAVATED FELONY - SEXUAL ABUSE OF A MINOR - INDECENCY
United States v. Balderas-Rubio, 499 F.3d 470 (5th Cir. Sept. 5, 2007) (Oklahoma conviction for indecency or lewd acts with a child under the age of sixteen, in violation of Okla. Stat. tit. 21, 1123, making it unlawful to "to intentionally look upon, touch, maul, or feel the body or private parts of any child under sixteen (16) years of age in any lewd or lascivious manner ...." constitutes "sexual abuse of a minor" for illegal re-entry sentencing purposes.)

Ninth Circuit

AGGRAVATED FELONY " CHILD PORNOGRAPHY " POSSESSION OF CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
Chavez-Solis v. Lynch, 803 F.3d 1004, 1009 (9th Cir. Oct. 6, 2015) (California conviction of possession of child pornography, Penal Code 311.11(a), is broader than the relevant federal aggravated felony statutory definition, and there is a realistic probability that overbroad conduct would be prosecuted in California, and this conviction therefore is not considered to be an aggravated felony for purposes of INA 101(a)(43)(I), 237(a)(2)(A)(iii): No provision of the federal statute's definition of sexually explicit conduct can be read to encompass any touching on any part of a child's body with the intent of arousing sexual desires. California's child pornography statute thus sweeps in depictions of a broader range of sexual conduct than the federal child pornography statute encompasses. On this basis, Penal Code 311.11(a) is categorically overinclusive.).

AGGRAVATED FELONY " CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
Aguilar-Turcios v. Holder, 740 F.3d 1294 (9th Cir. Jan. 23, 2014) (military conviction for violation of Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, providing that official use of government computers does not include viewing pornography, does not categorically constitute a aggravated felony, because one could violate the article without necessarily being guilty of all the elements of a generic federal child pornography offense).

AGGRAVATED FELONY " CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
Aguilar-Turcios v. Holder, 740 F.3d 1294 (9th Cir. Jan. 23, 2014) (military conviction for violation of Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, providing that official use of government computers does not include viewing pornography, does not categorically constitute a aggravated felony, because one could violate the article without necessarily being guilty of all the elements of a generic federal child pornography offense).

AGGRAVATED FELONY - CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
Aguilar-Turcios v. Holder, ___ F.3d ___, 2009 WL 3086012 (9th Cir. Sept. 29, 2009) (court martial violation of failing to comply with lawful general order that government computers shall be for official use, and that such "authorized purposes" may not include "uses involving pornography," in violation of Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice was not categorically an aggravated felony under INA 101(a)(43)(I), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(I), which specifically lists as aggravated felonies an offense described in 18 U.S.C. 2252(a)(2) and (a)(4), both requiring conduct involving a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct, since it is undisputed that a conviction for violating Article 92 does not necessarily involve a depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct).

Lower Courts of Ninth Circuit

AGGRAVATED FELONY " CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
People v. Petrovic, 224 Cal.App.4th 1510, 169 Cal.Rptr.3d 648 (2d Dist. Mar. 26, 2014) (California conviction of knowingly possessing or controlling child pornography on a computer, under Penal Code 311.11(a), punished merely visiting child pornography websites, without evidence of actual possession or control of the pornography), compare United States v. Kuchinski, 469 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2006) (Where a defendant lacks knowledge about the cache files, and concomitantly lacks access to and control over those files, it is not proper to charge him with possession and control of the child pornography).