Go to main contentsGo to search barGo to main menu
Tuesday, March 31, 2026 at 3:39 PM

Ingram Pleads Not Guilty to Visual Pornography of Minor

Ingram Pleads Not Guilty to Visual Pornography of Minor
Christopher Colby Ingram. Photo courtesy CCSO.

Christopher Colby Ingram appeared in the Tenth Judicial District Court in Fallon on Monday, April 15, before Judge Thomas Stockard, facing allegations of probation violations and newer, much more serious charges. 

In January 2022, Ingram was granted probation on two consecutive suspended sentences of 38-96 months in prison for Embezzlement of Value of $3,500 or more and 22-56 months for Theft by Controlling Property of Another Person Value of $650 or more but less than $3,500. During proceedings, it was determined that Ingram violated the terms of his probation. A Status Hearing was set for May 21. 

The new charges against Ingram include allegations of: 

Count I) Unlawful Use of a Minor 14 Years of Age or Older in producing Pornography or as a Subject of Sexual Portrayal or Performance, a Category A Felony which carries a potential penalty of life in a Nevada State Prison with the possibility of parole after 35 years, a fine up to $100,000, lifetime supervision, and requires registration as a sex offender. 

Count II) Possession of Visual Pornography of a Person Under 16 years of age, a Category D Felony punishable by 1-6 years in prison, a fine of up to $5,000, lifetime supervision, and registration as a sex offender. 

Counts III-V) Gross Misdemeanor charges of Capturing Image of Private Area of Another Person, each count punishable by up to 364 days in jail and fines of up to $2,000 per count. 

Count VI) Misdemeanor of Failure to Register as an Ex-Felon with Law Enforcement within 48 Hours, which carries up to 180 days in jail and a fine of up to $1,000. 

Ingram, represented by Richard P. Davies and Joel B. Barber, Esquires, pleaded Not Guilty to all six counts and waived his right to a speedy trial. At the defense counsel's request, a criminal settlement conference will be scheduled to resolve the matter. The case will be heard before a jury if there is no agreement between the state and Ingram. A Status Hearing was set for May 21.


Share
Rate

Comment

Comments

COMMENTS
Comment author: BonnieComment text: Good Luck to all of you. I mean this sincerely. My family fought the Navy for years. My parents owned Horse Creek (Pat and Linda Dempsey). They strung them along for years until they had no financial choice but to accept and get out. My Dad even hauled water for the Snow ranch trying to stay afloat. May God bless you all. I truly pray it works out for you.Comment publication date: 3/28/26, 9:22 PMComment source: Local Rancher Says Navy Land Expansion is Devastating His Family RanchComment author: Lynn JohnsonComment text: I remember your mother well; she was a lovely and kind woman. I loved hanging out at your home on Sheckler Road where she was always warm and welcoming.Comment publication date: 3/27/26, 7:12 PMComment source: June Irene Manhire (Pendarvis), née DriggsComment author: EvaComment text: Grandpa, I find myself wondering about you every so often. I see glimpses of your face in the years worn onto my dad. It makes me feel more connected to you in some way. I remember the familiar kindness from you that I know in my dad. I would’ve really liked to have a good conversation. I only have a handful of memories with you, but you were loving, and you were kind. I wish I was able to say more. If I am someone to you, I hope I make you proud. Thank you Aunt for this sweet post.Comment publication date: 3/27/26, 12:11 AMComment source: Obituary -- Randolph Floris Banovich C Comment author: RBCComment text: The Navy should reimburse the market cost of replacing the grazing land they are taking. Period.Comment publication date: 3/26/26, 10:38 AMComment source: Local Rancher Says Navy Land Expansion is Devastating His Family Ranch
SUPPORT OUR WORK