Man jailed for personal writings asks to withdraw guilty plea

By The Associated Press,
freedomforum.org staff

08.03.01

Printer-friendly page

Brian Dalton in 1999 police booking mug shot.

COLUMBUS, Ohio — The attorney for a Columbus man sentenced to prison for writing about his sexual fantasies in his personal diary has asked to withdraw his guilty plea.

If a judge grants the motion filed yesterday in Franklin County Common Pleas Court, the American Civil Liberties Union will mount a First Amendment challenge on behalf of Brian Dalton, 22.

The high-school dropout was charged with pandering obscenity over his writings about the sexual torture of children.

Typically, the pandering charge involves photographs or images of children engaging in sexual activity. The law was applied to Dalton for something he wrote — and never disseminated.

Civil-liberties groups and First Amendment advocates have questioned the constitutionality of the Ohio law under which Dalton was prosecuted.

"These are disturbing stories, but they're the private thoughts of a person in his own home," said Raymond Vasvari, legal director of the ACLU of Ohio, as quoted in a July 30 Baltimore Sun article. "Short of the ability to read minds, this is as close to punishing private thought as you can get."

"The idea that you could ban speech because it might lead you to think bad thoughts is supposedly an idea we rejected years ago," said Amy Adler, a New York University law professor, according to the Sun. "With child pornography, people are trying to rekindle an interest in that idea."

Dalton said the journal was never shown to anyone and did not describe any crime he intended to commit.

His parents this week disclosed that they reported Dalton to Columbus police after finding the 14-page journal. They discovered the journal while cleaning Dalton's apartment after he was arrested for violating probation.

He was on probation for 1998 convictions of pandering obscenity involving child pornography, and allegedly had failed to keep up with the homework assigned in his sex-offender treatment program.

Authorities earlier had said the journal was discovered by a probation officer, but the Daltons say the officials were covering for them, The Columbus Dispatch reported yesterday.

Dalton's parents said they wanted his parole revoked for a year or two, long enough for him to receive intensive sex-offender treatment in prison. They said they didn't dream he would be charged with pandering obscenity and sentenced to seven years.

Dalton opted to plead guilty to the pandering charge for creating the journal. A second pandering charge was dismissed.

In addition to the seven-year sentence, the judge revoked Dalton's probation and ordered him to serve the remaining 14 months of his previous 18-month sentence.

Dalton's attorney, Isabella Dixon, said he took the plea agreement because he did not want to go to trial. He feared getting a more severe sentence if convicted and was worried about the contents of the journal becoming public by being entered into evidence.

Vasvari has said the ACLU cannot get involved in the case until Dalton's plea is reversed. Prosecutors have 14 days to respond to Dalton's request before a judge makes a decision.

Update

Judge: Man sentenced for 'obscene' journal can't change guilty plea
Attorney plans to ask court to set aside Ohio man’s conviction or file delayed appeal, calls situation ‘a matter of grave constitutional concerns.’  09.05.01

Previous

Fictitious journal writings lead to prison sentence
Civil rights lawyer calls prosecuting Ohio man for private stories about sexually abusing children ‘a misapplication of what the (obscenity) law intends.’  07.05.01

Related

Thought police don't just exist in science fiction
Commentary Private journal, however disgusting, was self-expression that should not have been ruled a probation violation.  07.14.01