United States v. Timothy Sims, 708 F.3d 832

Sims faced charges for possession and attempted production of child pornography in October 2011; four days before trial he pled guilty to the possession counts.
At pretrial, the district court excluded the child-pornography images from the attempted-production trial but allowed some related materials to be admitted.
Post-plea, the government sought to admit Sims’s plea admissions as evidence of intent to produce child pornography; the court barred them as prejudicial.
The court later issued a written opinion changing its stance on the relevance of the excluded images, holding them largely irrelevant to the attempted-production charges and excluding them under Rule 403.
The government appealed, and the panel vacated the district court’s ruling, remanding for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.
The court held that intent to obtain lascivious material is central to the charged offense and that the district court abused its discretion by withholding probative evidence related to Sims’s possession.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court abused its discretion by excluding all evidence of possession	Government argues evidence is probative of intent	Sims contends evidence is unduly prejudicial and not probative	Yes; ruling vacated and remanded for individualized Rule 403 analysis
Whether intent to obtain lascivious imagery is central to the charged offense	Government asserts intent is pivotal to prove attempted production	Sims argues intent is less central or could be defeated by other defenses	Intent is pivotal; evidence bearing on intent is probative
Whether the district court properly balanced probative value against prejudicial effect under Rule 403	Evidence should be admitted if probative and not unduly prejudicial	Court correctly found high danger of prejudice from images and pleas	District court erred in blanket exclusion; require individualized assessment

United States v. Stout, 509 F.3d 796 (6th Cir. 2007) (abuse-of-discretion review for evidentiary rulings)
Inland Bulk Transfer Co. v. Cummins Engine Co., 332 F.3d 1007 (6th Cir. 2003) (district court limited jurisdiction to aid appeal)
United States v. Parkes, 668 F.3d 295 (6th Cir. 2012) (Rule 403 balancing requires weighing probative value against prejudice)
United States v. Khalil, 279 F.3d 358 (6th Cir. 2002) (elements of attempted production; substantial-step and intent factors)
United States v. Bilderbeck, 163 F.3d 971 (6th Cir. 1999) (influences of graphic evidence on prejudice)
United States v. Sanders, 95 F.3d 449 (6th Cir. 1996) (distinction between prejudicial and fair prejudice in Rule 403)