SE HABLA ESPAÑOL. MÓWIMY PO POLSKU.
To Get Us In Your Corner Call Now 312.883.9466
EXPERIENCED CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEYS DEFENDING CLIENTS NATIONWIDE

Chicago Child Pornography Attorney

Facing Criminal Accusations? We Can Help!

In Illinois, it is illegal to make, sell, or distribute sexual or explicit images and other media of children under the age of 18. The state is harsh in doling out punishments for those convicted of child pornography crimes, sometimes resulting in decades in prison and costly fines. If you are being charged with a sexual offense like child pornography, contact a Chicago criminal defense attorney today.

Our lawyers at Pissetzky & Berliner, LLC have more than 20 years of trial-tested experience, and we have the legal skills necessary to represent your case. Whether you are facing a state or federal sex crime, our firm can defend you and ensure your rights are respected. “Pornography Video Part I”

Click Here to Watch Part I & Part II of Attorney Pissetzky's Talk Regarding Pornography.

Child Pornography Laws in Illinois

Child pornography laws were established to protect children and act against any person involved in the creation or distribution of sexual imagery. The law also punishes anyone who allows children under their care to participate in child pornography, or to coerce children into participating. It is also illegal to knowingly and voluntarily possess child pornography. Child pornography is not limited to photographs, but may also include videos or any other media showing nude minor or minors participating in sexual acts. If the child involved is less than 13 years of age, the defendant may be charged with aggravated child pornography, and would face more severe penalties.

What is the Punishment for Child Pornography?

Sexual offenses, especially those committed against minors, are taken very seriously in Illinois. Because these penalties may be severe, it is crucial that you seek the help of an experienced criminal defense attorney who can defend your rights.

Those convicted of a child pornography crime may face the following consequences:

  • Felony charges
  • Substantial prison time
  • As much as $100,000 in fines
  • Lifelong registration as a sex offender in the state of Illinois
  • Probation
  • Community service

These penalties may vary depending on the circumstances of each crime, such as whether or not the accused is a repeat offender, or whether the accused was only in possession of child pornography or was creating and distributing. The court will consider these factors, as well as others, before deciding on a punishment.

Know Your Rights, Contact our Chicago Child Pornography Lawyers

At Pissetzky & Berliner, LLC, we understand the weight of your charges, and we are dedicated to ensuring each of our clients is fairly and aggressively represented to the very best of our abilities. We offer honest, nonjudgmental legal counsel in order to work with our clients and create a plan that works best for their situation and needs. We are not afraid of the tough cases, and our Chicago sex offense lawyers will stand beside you and defend your case in court when the circumstances require it.

Contact Pissetzky & Berliner, LLC to request a case consultation.

OUR CRIMINAL DEFENSE VICTORIES

  • Case Dismissed Case Dismissed After State Refuses to Cooperate
    People v. IP (2014) Mr. IP was arrested for possession of a large amount of a controlled substance after Chicago police executed a search warrant. Arguing that the information in the search warrant was fabricated, Mr. Pissetzky filed a Motion to Produce Informant. Against the odds, the judge granted the motion and ordered the State to produce the informant. When the State failed to do so, the judge dismissed the case.
  • Not Guilty Chicago Criminal Defense Attorney Secures a “Not Guilty” for Possession, Conspiracy, and Intent
    Chicago criminal defense attorney, Gal Pissetzky takes the fight all the way for his clients. Gal was able to secure a “not guilty” on all counts for his client in a case involving possession, conspiracy, and intent to distribute cocaine.
  • Case Overturned Chicago Criminal Defense Lawyer Gets Drug Case Overturned
    Chicago criminal defense attorney Gal Pissetzky takes the fight all the way for his clients, even when the fight involves creating new laws to protect their rights. While defending a day laborer accused of drug trafficking crimes, the prosecutor in the case questioned the man as to how he was able to come up with the $75,000 bail bond. The client was found guilty but Mr. Pissetzky objected to the bail bond reference and the case was overturned on appeal. When it was sent back to trial, Gal Pissetzky negotiated for time served and the client regained his freedom.
  • Not Guilty of All Charges Class X felony Possession with intent to deliver marijuana and cocaine

    Not Guilty of All Charges

    People v. LG – Not Guilty of a Class X felony Possession with intent to deliver marijuana and cocaine. Although the chicago police had a search warrant to search a home where they found large amounts of marijuana and cocaine, as well as an identification card and other proof of residency for LG, the judge found LG NOT GUILTY of all charges.

  • Sentenced Reduced Client Facing 40 Years Gets 4 Months Instead
    Chicago criminal defense attorney Gal Pissetzky argues for a light sentence and wins! Mr. BC was charged with a large drug conspiracy in a federal court case. He was personally responsible for distributing over 200 kilos of marijuana. After intense negotiations with the government and without ever having to become an informant or a snitch, Mr. Pissetzky convinced the judge that Mr. BC should receive a very short sentence of four months, despite the fact that he was facing up to 40 years in prison. The judge agreed with Mr. Pissetzky and sentenced Mr. BC to just four months in jail.
  • Not Guilty on All Counts Cross-Examination by Chicago Criminal Defense Attorney Leads to a “Not Guilty”
    People v. Z. (2009) – Mr. Z. was accused of transporting five kilograms of cocaine in a secret compartment of a car. After a trial in which Gal Pissetzky cross-examined officers from the elite narcotics division of the Chicago Police Department, the judge found Mr. Z. NOT GUILTY of all charges.
  • Federal Judge Imposes Light Sentence Over Government’s Objections Federal Crime
    U.S. v. HJ (2014) Mr. HJ was charged as the leader of a large Chicago drug organization. The government attributed over 26 kilos of cocaine to Mr. HJ, and sought a minimum 15-year-sentence based on his alleged leadership role. After a very contested sentencing hearing, during which Mr. Pissetzky argued that Mr. HJ was not a the leader of the organization and should therefore receive a much lower sentence, the judge agreed with Mr. Pissetzky and told the government it had not met its burden of proof. Although the judge found Mr. HJ responsible for 26 kilograms of cocaine, Mr. Pissetzky convinced the judge to sentence Mr. HJ to only 70 months–nine years less than what the government wanted.
  • Reduced Sentence Federal sentencing on drug conspiracy charges – 18 months for 26 kilos of cocaine without ever cooperating
    (USA v. MM) Mr. MM was charged in Federal Court with drug conspiracy to distribute over 26Kilograms of cocaine. The government used an informant and recorded calls. After long but successful negotiations with the government, Mr. Pissetzky was able to convince the prosecutor to amend the charges so MM won’t be facing the mandatory 10 years to life in prison. The government, however, still sought to send MM away for a long period of incarceration. MM never cooperated or became an informant!!!! Mr. Pissetzky filed a sentencing memorandum. During the federal sentencing hearing, Mr. Pissetzky argued to the Judge for a much reduced sentence. The Judge sentenced MM to a short 18months.
  • Not Guilty Gal Pissetzky Gains Not Guilty Verdict on Tough Drug Case. Defendant Wins!
    (People v. CC) – FINDING OF NOT GUILTY – CC was charge with possession with intent to deliver 175 grams of cocaine, and 4 guns where also found during the search of the apartment he was in. Chicago police had a search warrant to an apartment that they claimed CC was living in with his girlfriend. During the search of the apartment, the police recovered 4 guns, ammunition, 175 grams of cocaine, and a scale. At trial, attorney Pissetzky and one other attorney established through cross-examination that the State could not prove that CC actually lived in the apartment. The judge found CC NOT GUILTY of all charges.
  • Case Dismissed Gal Pissetzky Gets Federal Drug Case Dismissed After Cross Examining DEA Agents.
    Defendant Wins! (USA v LG) – RARE CASE OF NO PROBABLE CAUSE FINDING IN FEDERAL COURT – The DEA arrested LG with his wife and charged them with possession of 2.5 kilograms of cocaine. The government alleged at a preliminary hearing in federal court that LG’s wife was trying to sell the cocaine to an undercover DEA agents. Mr. Pissetzky was representing LG, who was arrested in the undercover DEA car after the wife handed the drugs to the DEA agent. During the hearing, Mr. Pissetzky questioned the DEA agent and established that LG was merely present during the drug deal. The federal magistrate judge found that there was not probable cause to arrest LG and ordered that the case against him be dismissed immediately.

TRUSTED AND HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

SEE WHAT OUR CLIENTS ARE SAYING
  • “Excellent Attorney”

    Former Client

  • “Fantastic attorney”

    Former Client

  • “I highly recommend Gal Pissetzky!!!”

    Sonni

  • “I HIGHLY RECOMMEND GAL PISSETZKY”
  • “Highly Recommended”

    Chrissy

  • “Very highly recommended!”

    Scott E.

  • “I knew I was done until I hired Gal”

    Former Client

  • “Excellent Lawyer!”

    Alberto

  • “Gal Pissetzky”

    Alejandro Martínez-Medina

  • “Gal saved my life!!!”

    Juan

  • “Best Attorney Ever”

    Joe

  • “Magnificent, impressive, very great work”

    Mr. & Mrs. LaGrone Sr.

  • “I will recommend him to anyone who really needs the best attorney!”

    Former Client

  • “Super professional and knowlegeable lawyer!”

    Diana

  • “He saved me from jail!”

    Former Client