Background
Kevin Lee Ross was previously convicted in two thousand fourteen of possessing child pornography and sentenced to ninety months of imprisonment followed by five years of supervised release. In two thousand twenty-three, probation officers searched his home and vehicle, discovering an unauthorized cell phone, a laptop, and an external hard drive containing over one thousand three hundred eighty files of child sexual abuse material. Ross was indicted and convicted again, arguing on appeal that the district court erred by allowing the government to display the actual images despite a joint stipulation regarding their nature.
The court’s reasoning
The court held that a criminal defendant may not stipulate or admit his way out of the full evidentiary force of the case as the government chooses to present it. The stipulation did not negate the need to prove the defendant’s knowledge and possession, which the government’s limited display of images helped establish. The district court did not abuse its discretion under Federal Rule of Evidence four zero three by admitting the exhibits or by allowing the agent to describe them.
A criminal defendant may not stipulate or admit his way out of the full evidentiary force of the case as the government chooses to present it.
Ross I, 837 F.3d at 90
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the government’s ability to present actual visual evidence of child sexual abuse material in trials even when the defendant has stipulated to the existence of such material, provided the display is limited and relevant to proving knowledge and possession.