Description: Sacramento, California criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with child molestation.

Christie Hirota is a detective with the Sacramento County Sheriff's Office. She is a member of the Sacramento Valley High-Tech Crimes Task Force, Internet Crimes Against Children. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (National Center) had issued a CyberTip to the Sacramento Valley Task Force based on information it had received from Dropbox that one of its accounts potentially contained child sexual abuse material (CSAM). Search warrants were executed against Dropbox, Google, Comcast, and Verizon. Detective Hirota reviewed the results of those searches.

Dropbox provided material from one of its accounts that consisted of six files. The files had been uploaded to Dropbox on May 20, 2021. Detective Hirota viewed the files, and four of them included videos of children involved in sex. Fifty-six videos and 14 images of CSAM were obtained from Dropbox.

Information in the Dropbox files indicated to Detective Hirota that defendant was the subscriber on the account and was using the account to store his files. The e-mail address of the user who uploaded the material was ali.banei@gmail.com. The username on the account was Ali Reza Fatemy. The username matched defendant's full name, Sayed Alireza Fatemy. The files from Dropbox also included videos and images of defendant's family and their government issued identification. Detective Hirota confirmed that the Comcast account for the IP address that matched the Dropbox account was linked to defendant. She also obtained from Comcast a physical address for that IP address.

* * *

Legal issue Did the defense counsel's actions, such as misidentifying the victim and failing to object or call an expert, constitute ineffective assistance of counsel in a child molestation and pornography case?
Headnote

CRIMINAL LAW. INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL. The appellate court considered whether defense counsel provided ineffective assistance by misidentifying the victim of child molestation, failing to object to certain investigative testimony, and not calling an expert witness to testify on Afghan cultural norms.

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE. The case examined whether a detective's testimony regarding data recovery processes and file placement in connection with child pornography charges was admissible without the detective being designated an expert witness.

CULTURAL DEFENSE. CULTURAL NORMS IN CHILD MOLESTATION CASES. The court addressed the defense's argument that the defendant's actions of touching his son's genitalia were consistent with rural Afghan cultural practices, and whether failure to call an expert witness on these cultural practices amounted to ineffective assistance of counsel.

CRIMINAL LAW. CUMULATIVE ERROR DOCTRINE. The court denied the defendant's claim of cumulative trial errors, concluding that even assuming certain deficiencies, these did not result in a prejudicial impact warranting reversal of the judgment.

Key Phrases Child molestation charges. Ineffective assistance of counsel. Data recovery process. Cultural defense. Cumulative error.

Outcome: Affirmed

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: