United States v. Dauray

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000 · Criminal Law

Criminal LawStatutory InterpretationChild PornographyRule of Lenity18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B)other mattercontainplain meaning

Facts

A state officer found Dauray in possession of thirteen unbound pictures of minors in a state park. The pictures were pieces of magazine pages and photocopies of those pages. The parties stipulated that Dauray possessed the depictions, knew their contents, and that the depictions had traveled in interstate commerce. The jury found four of the thirteen images depicted lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area, and Dauray was convicted under the then-existing version of § 2252(a)(4)(B), which prohibited possession of three or more books, magazines, periodicals, films, video tapes, or other matter which contain such depictions.

Issue

Whether individual loose pictures or photocopies cut from magazine pages are "other matter which contain any visual depiction" under the pre-1998 version of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(4)(B). If the statute is ambiguous on that point, whether the rule of lenity requires resolving the ambiguity in Dauray's favor.

Rule

A criminal statute must give fair warning of the conduct it makes criminal. When, after examining the statute's language, structure, canons of construction, legislative history, and relevant case law, a reasonable doubt persists as to the statute's intended scope, the rule of lenity requires the ambiguity to be resolved in the defendant's favor.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In 1997, federal prosecutors in Vermont charge Nolan Price under a criminal possession statute that forbids knowingly possessing "3 or more books, magazines, periodicals, films, video tapes, or other matter which contain" prohibited images. Officers found five loose glossy photographs in Nolan's backpack, and the statute does not define "contain" or "other matter."

If a court finds that "contain" could reasonably mean either "hold within" or "include/comprise," what is the best next step under the majority's approach?

Explanation. The majority began with plain meaning but held that competing ordinary meanings do not end the inquiry. The court must then use ordinary interpretive tools—context, canons, structure, amendment history, and legislative history. Lenity is a last resort, not an automatic response to the first sign of ambiguity.