985 F.3d 1070
8th Cir.2021Background
- Law enforcement found over 1,000 images (and 14 videos) of child pornography/erotica across Blanks’s devices and online accounts; phone history showed access to such material.
- Blanks was charged with receipt and possession of child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A; he moved to dismiss and to suppress seized evidence.
- Blanks and the Government executed a non‑binding plea agreement that required him to withdraw existing pretrial motions and waive the right to file further pretrial motions; a magistrate judge explained the consequences and Blanks confirmed the waiver.
- The district court rejected the plea agreement; Blanks then sought leave to re‑file pretrial motions after the deadline had passed, and the court denied that request.
- At trial Blanks stipulated the images were child pornography and moved to exclude their display as unfairly prejudicial; the court admitted 42 representative still images (no videos) out of the more than 1,000 seized.
- Blanks was convicted on three counts and sentenced to 130 months; he appealed the denial to re‑file motions and the Rule 403 admission of images.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court abused its discretion by denying leave to re‑file untimely pretrial motions after the plea agreement was rejected | Blanks: Rejection of plea was beyond his control; good cause exists to allow re‑filing | Gov: Blanks knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to file further motions at the magistrate hearing; waiver forecloses good‑cause exception | Affirmed — waiver was knowing and voluntary; no good cause to permit late motions |
| Whether the court abused its discretion by admitting 42 images despite Blanks’s stipulation and the court not viewing the images | Blanks: Images were unnecessary, unfairly prejudicial, cumulative; court should have viewed them and limited to one per location (≈6) | Gov: Prosecution may present its chosen evidence; representative sample across devices was probative; court limited number and took voir dire precautions | Affirmed — admission not an abuse; small representative sample probative and not substantially more prejudicial |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Bloate, 534 F.3d 893 (8th Cir. 2008) (knowing, voluntary waiver can preclude showing good cause for untimely pretrial motions)
- United States v. Fry, 792 F.3d 884 (8th Cir. 2015) (good‑cause standard for late Rule 12 motions requires cause and prejudice)
- United States v. Trancheff, 633 F.3d 696 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard of review for denial of untimely pretrial motions and evidentiary rulings)
- United States v. Garrido, 995 F.2d 808 (8th Cir. 1993) (waiver of pretrial motions when made voluntarily and with understanding is binding)
- United States v. Worthey, 716 F.3d 1107 (8th Cir. 2013) (admission of representative samples of child pornography may be appropriate)
- United States v. Sewell, 457 F.3d 841 (8th Cir. 2006) (stipulation to an element does not necessarily replace the prosecution’s chosen evidence)
- Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (1997) (limits on substituting stipulations for evidence are contextual)
- United States v. Becht, 267 F.3d 767 (8th Cir. 2001) (admission of numerous child pornography stills had limited prejudicial effect where precautions were taken)