State of Iowa v. Jesse Lee McCollaugh, 5 N.W.3d 620

Jesse Lee McCollaugh was convicted of sexual exploitation of a minor after his wife found videos secretly recorded by him of her 15-year-old sister using the bathroom, with her genitalia exposed.
The videos were filmed without the minor’s knowledge or consent through a window.
McCollaugh admitted to recording the videos and to having a sexual problem when confronted by his wife.
Law enforcement confirmed the existence of the videos during a search and charged McCollaugh under Iowa Code sections 728.12(3) and 903B.2.
McCollaugh waived a jury trial and was found guilty after a bench trial based on stipulated evidence (minutes of testimony), receiving a prison sentence and sex offender registration.
On appeal, McCollaugh contested both the sufficiency of the evidence for his conviction and the propriety of the sentencing, particularly the consideration of unproven facts.

Issue	McCollaugh's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Statutory Interpretation: Whether the statute requires proof of the minor's purpose in being nude for sexual gratification	State must prove victim’s purpose was to arouse/satisfy the viewer’s sexual desire; mere unintentional nudity (e.g., bathroom) isn’t covered	Statute requires only that the depiction was made for the purpose of arousing the viewer, not the minor’s intent or awareness	Statute does not require proof of the minor’s purpose; only defendant’s intent matters
Sufficiency of Evidence	No evidence victim intended nudity for sexual arousal; filming didn’t meet statutory standard	Defendant’s sexual purpose shown by context: videos were secret, found among pornography, and defendant’s admission of sexual problem	Evidence sufficient to support intent to satisfy defendant’s sexual desire
Sentencing—Improper Factor	Sentencing based on unproven fact (frequency of viewing videos) raised by prosecutor	District court didn’t rely on unproven fact in sentencing; reasons for sentence were separate and explicit	No reliance on improper factors; sentence affirmed

State v. Sanford, 814 N.W.2d 611 (Iowa 2012) (sets standard for review of sufficiency of evidence challenges)
State v. Robinson, 618 N.W.2d 306 (Iowa 2000) (discusses scope of Iowa Code sec. 728.12(3); not limited solely to lewd/lascivious depictions)
State v. Hunter, 550 N.W.2d 460 (Iowa 1996) (clarifies scienter requirement—purpose focuses on defendant’s intent, not the minor’s)
State v. Damme, 944 N.W.2d 98 (Iowa 2020) (standard for reviewing sentencing discretion and improper factors)
State v. Formaro, 638 N.W.2d 720 (Iowa 2002) (explains presumption in favor of sentencing within statutory limits)