Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

United States of America v. Daniel Kaler

Date: 09-09-2025

Case Number: 25-cr-04016

Judge: Leonard T. Strand

Court: The United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa (Woodbury County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: The United States Attorney's Office in Sioux City

Defendant's Attorney: Click Here For The Best Cedar Rapids, IA Criminal Defense Law Lawyer Directory

Description:
Sioux city, Iowa criminal defense lawyer represented the defendant charged with possession of child pornography.

Daniel Kaler, 38, of Sioux City, was accused of possessing, and receiving, more than 7,000 images and videos of child porn. A release from the Department of Justice said the illegal content included “sadistic or masochistic conduct” against children, infants, and toddlers. An investigation led officials to believe he used third-party web browsers to access and download the content.
Outcome:
The Defendant was found guilty and was sentenced to 64 months imprisonment. 5 years supervised release. $100 assessment. $500 AVAA assessment. $6,000 restitution..
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of United States of America v. Daniel Kaler?

The outcome was: The Defendant was found guilty and was sentenced to 64 months imprisonment. 5 years supervised release. $100 assessment. $500 AVAA assessment. $6,000 restitution..

Which court heard United States of America v. Daniel Kaler?

This case was heard in The United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa (Woodbury County), IA. The presiding judge was Leonard T. Strand.

Who were the attorneys in United States of America v. Daniel Kaler?

Plaintiff's attorney: The United States Attorney's Office in Sioux City. Defendant's attorney: Click Here For The Best Cedar Rapids, IA Criminal Defense Law Lawyer Directory.

When was United States of America v. Daniel Kaler decided?

This case was decided on September 9, 2025.