Covered by NYDaily News. Las Vegas man accused of threatening a prominent attorney and making vile remarks.
Covered by New York Times, and other outlets. Fake heiress accused of conning the city’s wealthy, and has an HBO special being made about her.
Accused of stalking Alec Baldwin. The case garnered nationwide attention, with USAToday, NYPost, and other media outlets following it closely.
Juror who prompted calls for new Ghislaine Maxwell trial turns to lawyer who defended Anna Sorokin.
Clients can use our portal to track the status of their case, stay in touch with us, upload documents, and more.
Regardless of the type of situation you're facing, our attorneys are here to help you get quality representation.
We can setup consultations in person, over Zoom, or over the phone to help you. Bottom line, we're here to help you win your case.
The Spodek Law Group understands how delicate high-profile cases can be, and has a strong track record of getting positive outcomes. Our lawyers service a clientele that is nationwide. With offices in both LA and NYC, and cases all across the country - Spodek Law Group is a top tier law firm.
Todd Spodek is a second generation attorney with immense experience. He has many years of experience handling 100’s of tough and hard to win trials. He’s been featured on major news outlets, such as New York Post, Newsweek, Fox 5 New York, South China Morning Post, Insider.com, and many others.
In 2022, Netflix released a series about one of Todd’s clients: Anna Delvey/Anna Sorokin.
Why Clients Choose Spodek Law Group
The reason is simple: clients want white glove service, and lawyers who can win. Every single client who works with the Spodek Law Group is aware that the attorney they hire could drastically change the outcome of their case. Hiring the Spodek Law Group means you’re taking your future seriously. Our lawyers handle cases nationwide, ranging from NYC to LA. Our philosophy is fair and simple: our nyc criminal lawyers only take on clients who we know will benefit from our services.
We’re selective about the clients we work with, and only take on cases we know align with our experience – and where we can make a difference. This is different from other law firms who are not invested in your success nor care about your outcome.
If you have a legal issue, call us for a consultation.
We are available 24/7, to help you with any – and all, challenges you face.
Last Updated on: 20th February 2024, 10:52 pm
Child pornography is undoubtedly a serious crime that causes significant harm. However, federal sentencing guidelines for non-production child pornography offenses have become increasingly severe over time, often driven more by emotional reactions and political pressures rather than empirical evidence. This has resulted in confusion, inconsistencies, and unduly harsh punishments that many argue are disproportionate to the culpability of offenders. Reforming these flawed guidelines will require nuanced conversations and a willingness to analyze tough issues objectively.
In the early 2000s, Congress passed several laws directing the United States Sentencing Commission to increase penalties for child pornography offenses. These included mandatory minimum sentences and specific offense level increases. For example, the PROTECT Act of 2003 directly amended the sentencing guidelines to add a 2-level enhancement for using a computer in the offense and reduced the ability of judges to depart downwards from the guidelines.At the time, these sentencing policies were likely driven more by public emotion and desire for harsh punishment rather than empirical analysis. As explained in a 2011 law review article by federal public defender Troy Stabenow:
“The political pressures that motivate changes to the child pornography guidelines severely limit the ability of the Sentencing Commission to develop these guidelines based on data, national experience, and input from experts.”
Unfortunately, in the years since, Congress has continued to pass laws directing further guideline amendments to increase penalties. The Sentencing Commission lacks clear authority to independently review or modify guidelines that were directly amended by Congress.This has resulted in a complex and disjointed sentencing structure with unduly severe penalties, as we’ll explore next.
According to a 2021 report by the Sentencing Commission analyzing data from fiscal year 2019:
This data shows the guidelines are clearly flawed and fail to provide consistency and proportionality in sentencing. Even within the same courthouses, similarly situated offenders often receive vastly divergent sentences.At the same time, sentences remain extremely lengthy even after accounting for routine downward departures by judges. As one analysis noted, these trends suggest “the statutory and guideline penalty structure governing child pornography offenses is fundamentally broken.”
There are several key factors that help explain the problems with federal child pornography sentencing:
The sentencing guidelines provide enhancements that apply very broadly, rather than targeting the most egregious offenses and offenders. For example, the +2 level enhancement for images depicting sadistic/masochistic conduct is defined so broadly that it applies routinely, rather than only for the most extreme content.Similarly, enhancements related to the number of images provide sharp increases in penalties based solely on arbitrary numerical thresholds rather than meaningful gradations in offense severity or culpability.
Many of the specific offense levels and enhancements lack empirical support regarding their impact on sentencing proportionality or effectiveness as public policy.Congress and the Commission have increased penalties without research into actual recidivism rates or danger posed by subgroups of offenders. This contradicts the Sentencing Commission’s original empirical approach when first developing sentencing guidelines in the 1980s.
The sentencing scheme has not kept pace with significant technological changes over the past 15-20 years. Offense levels and enhancements fail to account for the realities of digital content, including ease of copying and sharing massive collections online.As a result, guidelines often recommend sentences of 15, 20 years, or even life in prison for many non-production cases based predominantly on the arbitrary number of images in a collection.
Statutory mandatory minimums and restrictive guidelines constrain the ability of judges to impose sentences tailored to the individual circumstances of each case. This contributes to inconsistencies as judges find ways to work around the guidelines to avoid imposing unduly harsh punishments they consider unjust.
There seems to be growing recognition within the legal community that reforming federal child pornography sentencing is needed. But finding solutions remains challenging due to the complex legislative history and emotionally charged nature of these offenses.In testimony to the Sentencing Commission in 2012, even Justice Department representatives acknowledged issues with sentencing proportionality and suggested “the time is right to revisit the sentencing scheme.”Many experts argue comprehensive statutory changes by Congress are required to truly fix the dysfunctional sentencing structure. Suggested reforms include:
For real progress, policymakers must be willing to analyze these issues objectively, even when the subject matter makes that difficult. Research shows most child pornography offenders have little or no prior criminal history and low rates of sexual recidivism.Sentencing policies should account for such data to avoid imposing unjust punishments that lack public safety benefits. With a reasoned, evidence-based approach, a more fair and rational federal sentencing framework can emerge.
Please fill out the form below to receive a free consultation, we will respond to
your inquiry within 24-hours guaranteed.