Opinion ID: 618208
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Image Location and Number of Images

Text: Where images of child pornography exist on one’s personal computer or in one’s personal files, the jury may infer that the individual knowingly possessed the images. Moreover, the sheer number of images in a personal computer may be enough to imply that the computer owner knew of the existence of the images. In Mellies, we concluded that the fact that the defendant was the primary user of his computer, which contained thousands of child pornography images, was enough to sustain his conviction for possession of child pornography. Mellies, 329 F. App’x at 607. Decisions of our sister circuits have also upheld convictions of possession of child pornography where the images were located in the defendant’s personal files within a computer or where there were a significant number of images. See United States v. Burgess, 576 F.3d 1078, 1100–01 (10th 9 No. 10-1589 Cir. 2009) (thousands of images on hard drive, including in files that contained defendant’s other documents); Schene, 543 F.3d at 639–40 (10th Cir. 2008) (defendant and his wife both had access to computer, though most images were saved in defendant’s user account and his files); United States v. Irving, 452 F.3d 110, 122 (2d Cir. 2006) (defendant had seventy-six images in his computer, located in his “My Documents” file). Officers found ninety-six images and videos in Defendant’s home computer, in the “My Documents” folder of his password-protected user account. A reasonable juror could conclude that the location of the images in Defendant’s personal files and the number of images make it likely that he either saved them there himself or at least knew of and permitted their continued existence. Furthermore, over one thousand images of child pornography were located on Defendant’s CDs. The CDs were created before the other four individuals even knew Defendant. The sheer number of images on Defendant’s CDs and their creation dates support Defendant’s conviction for child pornography possession. 3. Image Titles Suggesting Nature of their Contents Where the labels or titles of images suggest their nature as child pornography, the jury may infer that an individual who possessed those images did so knowingly. United States v. Payne, 341 F.3d 393, 403–04 (5th Cir. 2003) (image titles plus admission of viewing images were sufficient evidence to uphold conviction for knowing possession of child pornography). The titles of many of the images in Defendant’s computer and on his CDs, such as “Babyface,” “LilSis06,” “1-06 facial,” 10 No. 10-1589 and “youngfuck,” contained words indicating that they contained child pornography.4 The images’ titles support the inference that Defendant knew that the images in his possession were child pornography. 4. The Collection of Evidence Supports Defendant’s Conviction In sum, Defendant admitted to a detective that his computer contained fake child pornography and that he recently viewed it. He admitted possessing real child pornography to McKichan. Images of real child pornography were located in Defendant’s computer, in his password-protected account, in his personal files. Thousands of images were also contained within Defendant’s CDs. The titles of the images indicated that they were child pornography. Although other individuals may have had access to Defendant’s computer at times, the evidence of Defendant’s guilt is overwhelming and thus is clearly sufficient for any rational trier of fact to have found, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Defendant knowingly possessed child pornography.