Legal Opinion
United States v. Branden Holena
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided October 10, 2018No. 17-3537PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BIBAS, Circuit Judge.
To protect the public, a sentencing judge may restrict a convicted defendant's use of computers and the internet. But to respect the defendant's constitutional liberties, the judge must tailor those restrictions to the danger posed by the defendant. A complete ban on computer and internet use "will rarely be sufficiently tailored." United States v. Albertson , 645 F.3d 191 , 197 (3d Cir. 2011). This case illustrates why.
Branden Holena was convicted of using the internet to try to entice a child into having sex. As a condition of his supervised release from prison, he may…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Gall v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- United States v. KnightsSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Kost v. KozakiewiczCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Packingham v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 2017
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Piasecki v. Court of Common Pleas, Bucks Cnty., PACourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2019
- United States v. BlairCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2019
- United States v. Peter Robert BobalCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2020
- United States v. Donald Thomas PerrinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019
- United States v. Charles SenkeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2021
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.