United States v. Christopher Lee
701 F. App'x 175
| 3rd Cir. | 2017Background
- Christopher Lee ran Boal Mansion Museum and supervised teenage volunteer docents who lived on-site; a 17-year-old accused Lee of attempted sexual contact and described a video with "hypnotic" music found on Lee’s laptop.
- Police executed warrants seizing multiple electronic devices; forensic review found a video of a naked, masturbating male who appeared to be a minor and a screenshot was included in a later child-pornography warrant application.
- Subsequent searches (including FBI-assisted warrants) recovered thousands of child-pornography images, dozens of cropped photos Lee had taken of docent teens focusing on genitals, and 26 sexually explicit stories—some illustrated with those cropped images—saved under Lee’s user account.
- Lee was indicted on multiple counts; relevant here are receipt and possession of child pornography (18 U.S.C. § 2252A), sexual exploitation for producing lascivious depictions (18 U.S.C. § 2251), and attempted obstruction of justice (18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(1)) based on phone calls urging his cousin to wipe a phone.
- District Court denied Lee’s motion to suppress the evidence from his devices, admitted three of the narratives over Lee’s motion in limine, and a jury convicted him on the counts presented; Lee appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Government) | Defendant's Argument (Lee) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of warrant to search electronic devices / probable cause | Affidavit, screenshot, expert declarations, and circumstances (molestation allegation + video) furnished a fair probability that child pornography would be found | Affidavit lacked sufficient detail; screenshot in record unclear; magistrate lacked probable cause | Warrant valid: affidavit plus expert viewings and contextual inferences provided probable cause |
| Sufficiency of evidence for §2251 sexual-exploitation (intent to produce) | Nexus between cropped images and sexually explicit stories, volume of images and stories, and contextual links support intent to produce lascivious depictions | Insufficient proof that Lee took photos with specific intent to produce sexually explicit images; challenge reviewed for plain error | Enough circumstantial evidence (stories tied to photos, quantity, parallels) to support conviction; no plain error |
| Admissibility of sexually explicit narratives (motion in limine / Rule 404(b)) | Narratives are intrinsic or, at minimum, admissible under Rule 404(b) to prove intent, knowledge, absence of mistake; probative value outweighs prejudice; limiting instruction reduces risk | Admission was unfairly prejudicial propensity evidence that should be redacted or excluded | No abuse of discretion: narratives admissible under Rule 404(b) for intent and related purposes; limiting instruction and partial selection mitigated prejudice |
| Attempted obstruction of justice (substantial step) | Calls to cousin to retrieve phone and have it wiped or to provide contact info for someone to wipe constituted substantial steps toward tampering | Actions were insufficiently proximate; no substantial step toward successful evidence destruction | Evidence showed multiple concrete steps and persistent efforts; jury could infer substantial step—conviction upheld |
Key Cases Cited
- Illinois v. Gates, 462 U.S. 213 (establishes totality-of-the-circumstances probable-cause standard)
- United States v. Pavulak, 700 F.3d 651 (3d Cir. 2012) (requirements for warrant affidavit re: child-pornography image descriptions)
- United States v. Jones, 994 F.2d 1051 (3d Cir. 1993) (review limited to whether affidavit supported magistrate’s decision)
- United States v. Knox, 32 F.3d 733 (3d Cir. 1994) (definition and scope of "lascivious exhibition")
- United States v. Larkin, 629 F.3d 177 (3d Cir. 2010) (intent to arouse as basis for sexual-exploitation conviction)
- United States v. Vosburgh, 602 F.3d 512 (3d Cir. 2010) (admissibility of suggestive material to rebut inadvertent-possession defense)
- United States v. Green, 617 F.3d 233 (3d Cir. 2010) (distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic evidence)
- United States v. Wolfe, 245 F.3d 257 (3d Cir. 2001) (standard for sufficiency review under Jackson)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (standard for sufficiency of evidence to sustain conviction)
- United States v. Ventresca, 380 U.S. 102 (probable-cause inferences reasonably drawn from affidavit)
- United States v. Gordon, 710 F.3d 1124 (10th Cir. 2013) (acts corroborating intent in obstruction context)
- United States v. Ortiz-Graulau, 526 F.3d 16 (1st Cir. 2008) (quantity of photos can support inference photos were taken to produce pornography)
- United States v. Dornhofer, 859 F.2d 1195 (4th Cir. 1988) (other writings reducing plausibility of innocent explanation)
- United States v. Hsu, 155 F.3d 189 (3d Cir. 1998) (attempt requires intent plus substantial step)