United States v. Winkler
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 8445
| 5th Cir. | 2011Background
- Winkler appeals his four-count conviction for receipt and possession of child pornography, challenging Counts One and Five on sufficiency grounds.
- ICE conducted two investigations (Operation Emissary and Operation Flicker) linking Winkler's credit card purchases and PayPal activity to a child-pornography network.
- Agents seized Winkler's computers and hard drives; forensic examiner found child-pornography images/videos on three drives, including the Maxtor drive at issue in Counts One and Five.
- On the Quantum drive and Seagate drive, images/videos were found in unusual directories (e.g., utilities folder, misnamed 'med study list'); on Maxtor, a user account contained 26 videos, with five found in a temporary internet cache.
- Evidence showed Winkler paid for access to members-only sites, clicked to view certain videos, and stored or organized files in nonstandard locations, suggesting knowledge and control.
- The district court denied acquittal and the jury convicted Winkler; the Fifth Circuit affirms, applying standard de novo review for sufficiency after a proper motion for acquittal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowingly receiving via cache | Cache-only files could be inadvertent; no proof of knowledge. | No evidence Winkler knew files were cached or that he accessed them; receipt not proven. | Conviction upheld; sufficient evidence shows knowing receipt. |
| Count Five sufficiency | Evidence shows Winkler downloaded and possessed specific videos; timing supported. | Alternative innocent explanations; no proof files traveled in interstate commerce. | Sufficient evidence supported Count Five; interstate-commerce link proved. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Dobbs, 629 F.3d 1199 (10th Cir. 2011) (conviction based on cache alone can be undermined when lack of knowledge shown)
- United States v. Bass, 411 F.3d 1198 (10th Cir. 2005) (knowledge shown where defendant used software to erase digital traces)
- United States v. Tucker, 305 F.3d 1193 (10th Cir. 2002) (knowledge supported when defendant knew images would be cached by browser)
- United States v. Pruitt, 638 F.3d 763 (11th Cir. 2011) (cache-related receipt conviction affirmed where evidence shows intent and targeting)
- United States v. Romm, 455 F.3d 990 (9th Cir. 2006) (conviction sustained where defendant controlled cached images and acknowledged possession)
- United States v. Kuchinski, 469 F.3d 853 (9th Cir. 2006) (possession not proven when defendant lacked knowledge of cache files (sentencing context))
- United States v. Runyan, 290 F.3d 223 (5th Cir. 2002) (circumstantial link tying images to internet origin supports jurisdiction)
- United States v. Stulock, 308 F.3d 922 (8th Cir. 2002) (acknowledges difficulty of counting cache images for possession/receipt)
- United States v. Dickson, 632 F.3d 186 (5th Cir. 2011) (receiving defined by ordinary meaning; no talismanic rule constrains analysis)