United States v. Christopher Myers
560 F. App'x 184
4th Cir.2014Background
- Myers was charged by a three-count superseding indictment with knowingly receiving, transporting, and possessing child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A; he was convicted on all counts and received sixty-month concurrent sentences.
- The relevant period for the charged receiving count is October 22, 2006, to November 20, 2006, coinciding with Myers’ Sick Child Room website membership.
- Images found on Myers’ 2010 laptop were admitted as depicting real, identified victims and were produced outside Maryland; the defense did not dispute the images’ illegality, only the knowledge element.
- The government argued that knowledge could be shown by circumstantial evidence, including actions indicating awareness that images would be saved to his computer.
- The district court excluded an optometrist defense expert on ocular albinism due to Rule 16 notice issues, and the defense presented other witnesses instead; the court affirmed the exclusion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowingly receiving child pornography—sufficiency of evidence | Myers argues evidence is only circumstantial | Government has no direct knowledge evidence beyond cache | Evidence sufficient to prove knowledge under §2252A |
| Exclusion of defense expert on ocular albinism | Government could not prepare; timeliness defect | Rule 16 notice requirement violated; no abuse of discretion | District court did not abuse discretion in excluding the expert |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Winkler, 639 F.3d 692 (5th Cir. 2011) (knowledge and circumstantial evidence in receipt cases)
- United States v. Ramos, 685 F.3d 120 (2d Cir. 2012) (collects standards for knowledge from circumstantial evidence)
- United States v. Flyer, 633 F.3d 911 (9th Cir. 2011) (cache presence alone not enough for knowing receipt)
- United States v. Pruitt, 638 F.3d 763 (11th Cir. 2011) (reiterates circumstantial evidence as proof of knowledge)
- United States v. Bass, 411 F.3d 1198 (10th Cir. 2005) (scrubbing evidence supports knowledge)
- United States v. Johnson, 617 F.3d 286 (4th Cir. 2010) (analysis of expert testimony admissibility under discretion)