Opinion ID: 171258
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Sufficiency of the evidence: Schene committing the crime

Text: Schene next appeals the sufficiency of the evidence that he  and not his wife  committed the offenses. Schene raised this issue in his Rule 29 motions for judgment of acquittal, and it was the thrust of his defense at trial. The evidence was sufficient to establish that it was Schene, and not someone else, who committed the crimes charged. `Evidence is sufficient to support a conviction if a reasonable jury could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, given the direct and circumstantial evidence, along with reasonable inferences therefrom, taken in a light most favorable to the government.' United States v. Nelson, 383 F.3d 1227, 1229 (10th Cir.2004) (quoting United States v. Wilson, 107 F.3d 774, 778 (10th Cir.1997)). We will not weigh conflicting evidence or second-guess the fact-finding decisions of the jury. United States v. Summers, 414 F.3d 1287, 1293 (10th Cir.2005). Rather than examining the evidence in `bits and pieces,' we evaluate the sufficiency of the evidence by `considering the collective inferences to be drawn from the evidence as a whole.' Nelson, 383 F.3d at 1229 (quoting Wilson, 107 F.3d at 778). Schene does not contest that the computer contained the charged images of child pornography, or that the only people with access to the computer were Schene and his wife. Government investigators found over 1900 images of child pornography, with images appearing under both of the operating system's user accounts and under two AOL screen names  outdoorguy and ccarlin317. Schene had access to both user accounts, and he admitted to using the screen name ccarlin317. Also, two of the government's witnesses testified regarding the likelihood of Schene  rather than his wife  viewing the child pornography. One of the witnesses, Agent Weaver, explained that when the officers first examined Schene's computer, the images of child pornography started popping up only after they switched to show [Schene]'s account. Tr. at 56. From this collection of evidence, a reasonable jury could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Schene  and not his wife  knowingly possessed the child pornography, and the evidence was sufficient to support Schene's conviction.