Anthony Joseph Enright, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

ARGUED: Melissa Susanne Baldwin, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, INC., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Judge Quattlebaum wrote a concurring opinion. Chief Judge Gregory wrote the opinion, in which Judge Floyd and Judge Quattlebaum joined. Reversed and vacated and remanded with instructions by published opinion. (1:15-cr-00016-MR-WCM-1) Argued: OctoDecided: JanuBefore GREGORY, Chief Judge, FLOYD, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. ROBERT DALE ELLIS, Defendant – Appellant. 19-4159 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. Accordingly, the court reversed and remanded with instructions to strike those conditions of supervised release. The government’s remaining arguments fail for the same reasons as the pornography restriction. The court also concluded that an outright ban on defendant's internet access cannot be sustained under section 3583(d)(1)'s 'reasonably related' requirement absent some evidence linking his offense or criminal history to unlawful use of the internet. Finally, the pornography restriction impermissibly restricts more liberty than is reasonably necessary. Furthermore, when defendant lied about watching pornography during a polygraph exam at the outset of his sex offender treatment, the violative conduct was dishonesty, not pornography consumption. The court stated that pornography use was not the basis of any violation. In this case, defendant violated his release by travelling outside the judicial district without permission, skipping therapy appointments, and lying to his probation officer, among other similar violative conduct. The court explained that the district court abused its discretion in imposing an outright ban on defendant possessing legal pornography or entering any location where it may be accessed. 3583(d)(1) and are overbroad under 18 U.S.C. The Fourth Circuit held that defendant's conditions of supervised release banning legal pornography and internet access cannot be sustained as 'reasonably related' under 18 U.S.C.

Zed by M.V. Ellis