United States v. Loughry, 738 F.3d 166

Loughry was on his second appeal after a prior reversal due to admission of hard core child pornography videos.
At his second trial, the government avoided the hard core videos and relied on images from Loughry’s residence linked to the Cache site.
The district court admitted home-item images under Rules 404(b) and 414, finding strong probative value linking Loughry to the Cache as Mayorroger.
The district court allowed jurors to view a binder of home images during deliberations, despite Loughry’s objection.
The jury convicted Loughry on all sixteen counts; on appeal, he challenges only the jury-room handling of the evidence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether sending admitted home evidence to the jury room was an abuse of discretion	Loughry argues it was prejudicial and improper to place the binder with sensitive images before jurors.	Loughry contends the district court properly exercised discretion given probative value and context.	No abuse; probative value outweighs prejudice; allowed in deliberations.
Whether the evidence in the jury room violated due process or fairness	The images could inflame jurors and bias their evaluation.	The evidence was highly probative of identity and distribution on the Cache.	Not unfairly prejudicial; permissible under the sliding scale analysis.
Whether the district court correctly weighed probative value against prejudice	The images were highly inflammatory and should have been excluded.	The images had substantial probative value due to similarity to Cache materials.	Court acted within its discretion; probative value justified inclusion.

Deicher v. City of Evansville, 545 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2008) (district court may exclude even properly admitted exhibits in deliberations)
Baugh ex rel. Baugh v. Cuprum S.A. de C.V., 730 F.3d 701 (7th Cir. 2013) (review of exhibit handling requires reasonable discretion)
Parker v. United States, 491 F.2d 517 (8th Cir. 1973) (exhibits may be excluded if cumulative or prejudicial)
United States v. Petty, 132 F.3d 373 (7th Cir. 1997) (sending prosecution evidence to jury can reinforce prejudice)
United States v. Chambers, 642 F.3d 588 (7th Cir. 2011) (unfair prejudice requires more than prejudicial content; must be unfair)
United States v. Earls, 704 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 2012) (probative value vs. prejudice on a sliding scale)
Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 (U.S. 1997) (unfair prejudice defined as emotion-driven decision risk)
United States v. Carrillo-Figueroa, 34 F.3d 33 (1st Cir. 1994) (proper exhibit handling balancing probative value and prejudice)
United States v. DeCoito, 764 F.2d 690 (9th Cir. 1985) (exhibits admissible under Rule 404(b) and Rule 414 considerations)
United States v. Gross, 451 F.2d 1355 (7th Cir. 1971) (courts may deny access to certain exhibits to juries)