United States v. Scott Boyle, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 24223

Boyle was convicted after a jury trial of counts involving sexual exploitation of a minor and possession of materials involving a minor, with a 180-month sentence.
Two videotapes were discovered behind Boyle’s desk; Lutz identified one child as Boyle’s daughter A.B. and suspected the other as Marek’s daughter S.M.
Police traced the tapes to S.M.’s home and to Marek’s daughter, with one tape containing three scenes showing A.B. and S.M. nude, in a bathtub, and a loop of still images of a prepubescent vagina.
The grand jury charged three counts: two on producing still and moving images of minors and one on possessing the materials depicting minors; Count One was later dismissed for insufficient evidence.
The district court instructed the jury on Counts Two and Three and the jury convicted Boyle on both counts; Boyle challenged multiple trial-related issues on appeal.
Key arguments on appeal included unanimity concerns, double jeopardy, public trial rights, and the sufficiency of evidence for Counts Two and Three.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Unanimity for Count Two after Count One dismissal	Boyle argues thejury could convict on still images, not moving ones.	District court’s lack of a limiting instruction risks nonunanimous verdict.	General unanimity instruction sufficed; no plain error.
Double jeopardy from acquitted conduct basis for Count Two	Prosecution implied Count Two used the same evidence as Count One.	Opening statement does not prove Count Two rested on acquitted conduct.	No double jeopardy violation; moving images supported Count Two.
Public-trial rights and monitor darkening during trial	Darkening the gallery monitor violated public trial requirements.	No closure; trial remained open to the public overall.	No plain error; public-trial rights not violated.
Sufficiency of the evidence for Count Two (2251(a)/(e))	Evidence insufficient to show producing sexually explicit images.	Evidence supported at least an attempt to produce such images.	Evidence sufficient to support conviction on Count Two (attempt).
Sufficiency of the evidence for Count Three (2252(a)(4)(B)/(b)(2))	Still images or moving images could support possession.	Questioned whether images depicted a minor and connected interstate movement.	Evidence sufficient; still images reasonably depicted a minor and moved in commerce.

Griffin v. United States, 504 U.S. 46 (1991) (limits on treating multiple bases of conviction when some lack evidentiary support)
Yates v. United States, 354 U.S. 298 (1957) (verdicts must be assessed for the specific grounds supported by evidence)
Stromberg v. California, 283 U.S. 359 (1931) (verdicts should not rest on uncertain grounds when possible)
Griffin v. United States, 502 U.S. 46 (1991) (Yates/Stromberg rule refined; revolved around multiple bases for conviction)
United States v. Lalley, 257 F.3d 751 (8th Cir. 2001) (general unanimity instruction generally suffices)
United States v. Davis, 154 F.3d 772 (8th Cir. 1998) (unanimity instruction adequacy in multi-ground cases)
United States v. Dreamer, 88 F.3d 655 (8th Cir. 1996) (when multiple grounds exist, verdict should be treated as supported by one)
United States v. Johnson, 639 F.3d 433 (8th Cir. 2011) (evidence credibility and inference in sufficiency review)
United States v. Koch, 625 F.3d 470 (8th Cir. 2010) (interstate commerce connection essential for jurisdiction)
United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995) (commerce clause precedents govern jurisdictional elements)