Jacob Lane Rowan v. State
05-14-01310-CR
Tex. App.Jun 2, 2015Background
- Fifteen-year-old S.H. received an explicit text and photo; her father turned the phone over to Dennison police.
- Phone traced to appellant’s stepmother but was used by appellant; forensic exam of appellant’s phone found ~400 explicit images, ~100 of children.
- Appellant was indicted on six counts of possession of child pornography (images alleged to depict minors engaged in masturbation or lewd exhibition).
- Jury convicted on all six counts; trial court sentenced ten years and $250 fine per count, with counts 1–5 consecutive and count 6 concurrent to count 5.
- On appeal, Rowan challenged (1) legal sufficiency of the photographic evidence to show masturbation/lewdness and (2) admission of State expert Catherine Strain’s testimony identifying the subjects as minors.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence that photos depict masturbation/lewd conduct | State: photos’ focal point, nudity, poses, and manipulation of genitals support lewdness/masturbation | Rowan: still photos cannot show masturbation (requires movement); exhibits 6–9 not proven lewd without author/intent proof | Affirmed: reasonable jury could find photos depict masturbation/lewd exhibition; still photos can depict movement and images showed focal genitalia, unnatural poses, and intent to elicit sexual response |
| Admissibility of expert testimony that subjects were minors | State: expert testimony that subjects were under 18 was probative and admissible | Rowan: expert not qualified/unreliable at trial; on appeal argued testimony irrelevant since minor status not disputed | Affirmed: appellate complaint differed from trial objection (waived); no reversible error |
Key Cases Cited
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence)
- Lancon v. State, 253 S.W.3d 699 (jury as sole judge of credibility and weight)
- Hooper v. State, 214 S.W.3d 9 (consider cumulative force of evidence in sufficiency review)
- Alexander v. State, 906 S.W.2d 107 (factors for determining whether depiction of a child is lewd)
- Williams v. State, 270 S.W.3d 140 (use common meaning to define "masturbation" when statute silent)
- Rezac v. State, 782 S.W.2d 869 (preserving error by making same complaint at trial and appeal)
- Jones v. State, 111 S.W.3d 600 (same waiver rule for appellate complaints)