Columbus Pandering Obscenity of a Minor Lawyers

At Sabol Mallory LLC, we understand the overwhelming stress and concern that accompanies a pandering obscenity to a minor charge in Columbus, Ohio. We are committed to offering compassionate and knowledgeable support as you navigate this challenging time.

Understanding Pandering Obscenity to a Minor

Pandering obscenity to a minor is a serious offense in Ohio, involving the creation, reproduction, or distribution of obscene material featuring minors. According to Ohio Revised Code § 2907.01(F), material is considered obscene if it meets certain criteria, such as appealing to prurient interests or depicting sexual activity in a way that reduces human beings to mere objects of sexual desire. The law also considers content that depicts bestiality, extreme violence, or scatological interest as obscene, particularly if it lacks any genuine educational, scientific, or artistic purpose.

Charges and Penalties for Pandering Obscenity in Ohio

Ohio law, specifically under Ohio Revised Code § 2907.32, defines several actions that can lead to a pandering obscenity charge. These include creating or distributing obscene material with knowledge of its content, promoting or advertising such material for commercial purposes, and participating in obscene performances. Convictions for pandering obscenity can result in felony charges, with penalties ranging from six to 12 months in prison and fines up to $2,500. Repeat offenders face more severe consequences, with fourth-degree felony charges leading to six to 18 months in prison and fines up to $5,000.

Pandering Obscenity Involving a Minor

When obscene material involves a minor, the penalties become even more severe. Ohio Revised Code § 2907.321 outlines the offenses related to pandering obscenity involving a minor. These include creating, reproducing, or publishing any obscene material that has a minor as one of its participants or portrayed observers, promoting or advertising such material for sale or dissemination, and selling, delivering, disseminating, displaying, exhibiting, presenting, renting, or providing any obscene material involving minors.

Other offenses include creating, directing, or producing an obscene performance that has a minor as one of its participants, and advertising, promoting, presenting, or participating in such a performance. Bringing or causing obscene material with minors to be brought into the state is also covered under this statute. Such offenses are classified as second-degree felonies, punishable by two to eight years in prison and fines up to $15,000. Possession of obscene material involving minors can lead to fourth-degree felony charges, with penalties of six to 18 months in prison and fines up to $5,000. Prior convictions can elevate these charges to third-degree felonies, resulting in nine months to five years in prison and fines up to $10,000.

Experienced Advocacy

At Sabol Mallory LLC, we have over 20 years of combined experience in defending individuals against various criminal charges, including pandering obscenity to a minor. We recognize the gravity of these charges and the potential impact on your future. Our team is dedicated to providing a thorough defense strategy tailored to your unique circumstances.

Immediate Steps to Take

If you have been arrested for pandering obscenity to a minor in Columbus, Ohio, it is crucial to refrain from speaking to authorities without legal representation. Contact Sabol Mallory LLC as soon as possible to ensure your rights are protected. We will guide you through the legal process, answer all your questions, and work tirelessly to pursue the best possible outcome for your case.

Avoiding Common Mistakes After Arrest for Pandering Obscenity to a Minor

If you have been arrested for pandering obscenity to a minor in Columbus, it’s essential to navigate the legal process carefully to protect your rights and future. Here are some common mistakes to avoid, and how Sabol Mallory LLC can assist you during this challenging time.

Speaking to Authorities Without Legal Representation

One of the most critical mistakes individuals make after being arrested for pandering obscenity to a minor is speaking to law enforcement without first consulting with a qualified attorney. Anything you say can be used against you in court, and without proper legal guidance, you may inadvertently incriminate yourself or provide information that could harm your defense.

Delaying Legal Counsel

Another common error is delaying the hiring of an attorney. Prompt legal representation is crucial in criminal cases, especially those involving serious charges like pandering obscenity to a minor. Waiting too long to seek legal advice can weaken your defense and limit the options available to achieve a favorable outcome.

Discussing the Case with Others

It’s natural to seek support from friends or family during difficult times. However, discussing details of your case with anyone other than your attorney can be risky. Confidentiality is crucial in legal matters, and information shared with others could potentially be used against you. It’s best to confide only in your legal counsel about the specifics of your situation.

How Sabol Mallory LLC Can Help

At Sabol Mallory LLC, we understand the complexities and seriousness of pandering obscenity to a minor charges in Columbus, OH. Our team has extensive experience in defending individuals facing similar allegations, and we are here to provide you with the guidance and support you need.

Legal Consultation and Guidance

If you have questions or concerns about your pandering obscenity to a minor charge, Sabol Mallory LLC offers a free initial consultation to discuss your case. During this consultation, we will review the details of your arrest, explain your legal rights, and provide clarity on the potential outcomes and strategies moving forward.

Building a Strong Defense

Our attorneys will work diligently to build a strong defense tailored to the specifics of your case. We will conduct a thorough investigation, gather evidence, and challenge any weaknesses in the prosecution’s case. Our goal is to protect your rights, minimize the potential consequences, and achieve the best possible outcome for your situation.

Columbus, Ohio Pandering Obscenity of a Minor Lawyers Client Story

This client story is for educational purposes only.

In the heart of Columbus, Jack found himself facing a daunting challenge. Accused of a serious offense — pandering obscenity to a minor — his world seemed to crumble around him. Anxiety gripped him as he navigated the unfamiliar corridors of the legal system, fearing for his future and reputation.

Amidst the uncertainty, Jack sought guidance. That’s when he found Dan Sabol, a compassionate lawyer at Sabol Mallory LLC. From their first meeting, Jack felt a glimmer of hope. Dan listened attentively, understanding the gravity of Jack’s situation and the impact it had on his life.

Dan Sabol didn’t just see a case; he saw Jack — a person with a story, with fears and hopes. He took the time to explain the legal process in clear, simple terms that Jack could understand. With unwavering dedication, Dan crafted a defense strategy tailored to Jack’s unique circumstances.

Throughout the ordeal, Dan and his team at Sabol Mallory LLC stood by Jack’s side. They meticulously gathered evidence, challenged questionable aspects of the prosecution’s case, and fought tirelessly in court. Their commitment to justice and Jack’s cause never wavered.

As the trial unfolded, Jack felt a mix of nerves and cautious optimism. Dan’s experience and steadfast advocacy shone through every courtroom argument. His confidence was contagious, instilling in Jack a newfound belief that justice could prevail.

Finally, the moment arrived — a verdict.

Not guilty.

Relief washed over Jack as he realized that with Dan Sabol’s help, he had overcome the odds. The weight that had burdened him for so long lifted, replaced by gratitude for Dan and his team at Sabol Mallory LLC.

Today, Jack reflects on his journey with profound gratitude. He knows he made the right choice in trusting Dan Sabol — a lawyer who not only defended his case but also understood the human side of his predicament. Jack’s story is a testament to the power of dedicated legal representation and the hope it can bring to those facing their darkest hours.

Contact Sabol Mallory LLC Today

Facing charges for pandering obscenity to a minor in Columbus, Ohio can be overwhelming, but you don’t have to face it alone. At Sabol Mallory LLC, we understand the challenges you are up against and are here to help.

Free Consultations

We offer free consultations to discuss your case and provide clarity on your legal options. This initial meeting is an opportunity for you to ask questions, share your concerns, and learn how we can assist you in navigating the legal process ahead.

Dedicated Legal Representation

Our team at Sabol Mallory LLC is committed to fighting for the best possible outcome for your case. We understand the nuances of pandering obscenity charges and will work diligently to protect your rights and defend your innocence.

Contact Us Today

If you or someone you know has been arrested for pandering obscenity to a minor in Columbus, OH, don’t delay in seeking legal representation. Contact Sabol Mallory LLC and let us guide you through this challenging time with compassion, and a commitment to achieving the best results for your future.

Columbus, OH Pandering Obscenity Resources

State ex rel. Flynt v. Dinkelacker, 156 Ohio App.3d 595, 2004-Ohio-1695 — Hustler magazine publisher Larry Flynt was convicted in February 1977 of pandering obscenity and engaging in organized crime for selling material that was judged to be obscene, but the sentence was later overturned. Larry Flynt and his brother, Jimmy Flynt, were indicted on 15 charges of pandering obscenity in March 1998, and they agreed to stop selling sexually explicit videos, pay a $10,000 fine, and plead guilty to two counts of pandering obscenity. While a prosecutor tried to reinstate the 15 felony charges in June 2003 after Flynt allegedly began selling videos from a different store in Cincinnati, but the First District Court of Appeals granted the Flynts’ writ of prohibition preventing a Hamilton County Common Pleas Court judge from proceeding in the state’s prosecution of the brothers on the previously dismissed indictment.

State v. Dalton, Nos. 01AP-1313, 02AP-117 — Brian Dalton pleaded guilty in 1998 to five counts of pandering obscenity involving a minor and five counts of pandering sexually oriented material involving a minor. Dalton was granted judicial release and placed on probation for three years after serving almost four months of his prison term, but he was arrested for his lack of participation in a sex-offender-treatment program. Dalton’s mother informed his probation officer that she was concerned about some items she had found in his apartment, and one of the items that Dalton’s probation officer collected was a personal journal that depicted Dalton’s personal fantasies of the violent torture and rape of a number of fictitious minor children. Dalton was charged with two counts of pandering obscenity involving a minor, based solely on the content of his personal journal. He entered a guilty plea to one count in exchange for the dismissal of the other count. After the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas denied Dalton’s motion to vacate his guilty plea, the Tenth District Court of Appeals reversed that judgment, vacated the court’s 2001 judgment, and remanded the case to the trial court.

Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973) — “The Miller Test” is also known as the “three prong obscenity test,” and its name is derived from this landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court. Marvin Miller was the owner and operator of a California mail-order business convicted of violating a state law prohibiting the distribution of obscene material after conducting a mass mailing campaign to advertise the sale of “adult” material, and the Supreme Court held that obscene material is not protected by the First Amendment and a “work may be subject to state regulation where that work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest in sex; portrays, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and, taken as a whole, does not have serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.” The Court established the following three criteria for the test of what constitutes obscenity: “(a) whether ‘the average person, applying contemporary community standards’ would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, Roth, supra, at 354 U. S. 489, (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law, and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”