The State v. Williams.
347 Ga. App. 183
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2018Background
- Defendant Keith Eric Williams was indicted on 48 counts under OCGA § 16-12-100(b)(8) after a search of multiple electronic devices allegedly uncovered numerous images of child pornography.
- Each count alleged possession of a separate and distinct image depicting a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct.
- Williams filed a demurrer seeking dismissal of counts 2–48 as multiplicitous, arguing the statute criminalizes a single possession for material seized in one search.
- The trial court granted the demurrer, treating simultaneous possession of multiple images at a single location/search as a single act.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed whether the statute’s unit of prosecution is per image or per possession event/search.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether OCGA § 16-12-100(b)(8) permits separate charges for each individual image of child pornography | State: each image is a distinct unit of prosecution; each depiction is separate harm | Williams: "any material" means a single possession event; simultaneous possession in one location/search yields one offense | Per-image prosecution allowed; counts 2–48 not multiplicitous |
Key Cases Cited
- Chancey v. State, 256 Ga. 415 (defines multiplicity)
- Rooney v. State, 287 Ga. 1 (statutory definition governs unit of prosecution)
- Sanabria v. U.S., 437 U.S. 54 (legislature defines offenses; unit-of-prosecution analysis)
- State v. Marlowe, 277 Ga. 383 (unit of prosecution requirement)
- Dubois v. Brantley, 297 Ga. 575 (statutory interpretation principles)
- Coates v. State, 342 Ga. App. 148 (each item as unit of prosecution where statute uses "any")
- Bennett v. State, 292 Ga. App. 382 (statute’s protective purpose and scope)