Opinion ID: 152994
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: sufficiency of the evidence

Text: Defendant first argues that there was insufficient evidence to find him guilty of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2251(b) beyond a reasonable doubt. “When deciding whether a conviction is supported by sufficient evidence, we determine ‘whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.’” United States v. Russell, 595 F.3d 633, 644 (6th Cir. 2010) (quoting United States v. Kone, 307 F.3d 430, 433 (6th Cir. 2002)). “‘In making this determination, however, we may not reweigh the evidence, reevaluate the credibility of witnesses, or substitute our judgment for that of the jury.’” United States v. Deitz, 577 F.3d 672, 677 (6th Cir. 2009) (quoting United States v. Martinez, 430 F.3d 317, 330 (6th Cir. 2005)). To find defendant guilty, the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that 1) defendant was the parent, legal guardian, or a person having custody or control over the victim; 2) the victim was a minor; 3) defendant knowingly permitted the minor to engage in sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing a visual depiction of such conduct; and 4) the visual depiction was transported in interstate commerce or the 4 equipment used to create the depiction had been transported in interstate commerce. See 18 U.S.C. § 2251(b). Defendant does not dispute that D. was a minor, that defendant had custody or control over D., or that the materials used to take illicit photographs traveled in interstate commerce. Instead, defendant argues that there was insufficient evidence that he was the one that took photographs of D. Defendant identifies several facts that weakened the government’s case against him: his incarceration when one of the photographs was taken; D.’s refusal to tell the counselor about defendant’s actions; D.’s admission that she only remembered that defendant took the photographs when her great-grandfather reminded her; and the fact that D. was better at using a computer than was defendant. Defendant also contends that his confession should carry little weight because it was motivated by a hope that he would receive a lighter sentence.1 Notwithstanding the weaknesses identified by defendant, there is sufficient evidence for a rational jury to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of violating section 2251(b). The evidence against defendant included the testimony of the victim and defendant’s own confession. The jury was entitled to credit the victim’s testimony over defendant’s, and we may not substitute our judgment for that of the jury. The testimony of the victim is, by itself, sufficient evidence for conviction. See United States v. Terry, 362 F.2d 914, 916 (6th Cir. 1966) (“The testimony of the prosecuting witness, if believed by the jury, is sufficient to support a verdict of guilty.”); see also Tucker v. Palmer, 541 F.3d 652, 658 (6th Cir. 2008). Sufficient evidence supports the jury’s verdict. 1 Defendant did not challenge the voluntariness of his confession before the district court, and does not do so here. 5