It’s amazing how disparate sentencing can sometimes be between federal and state court. In federal court, you will routinely see opinions that involve 30- (or 40- or 100-) year sentences for possession of child pornography. Whereas, today, in state court, you read an opinion in which the defendant is convicted of possession of child pornography — numerous pictures of a 13-year old daughter of his girlfriend — and he receives . . . one year in county jail.

That’s a big difference.
P.S. – The opinion also holds that it’s too vague for a condition of probation to be that the defendant not possess any “pornography” at all. It’s a sufficiently indefinite term — how do you decide what counts as “prurient” sexual content? — that it “would prevent [defendant]
from viewing Oscar-winning films like American Beauty and Brokeback
Mountain, television shows like The Wire, or sexually explicit works of art
that appear in museums.”