United States v. Schaefer
501 F.3d 1197, 2007 WL 2537656, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 21200 (2007)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
To satisfy the jurisdictional element of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a), the government must present specific evidence that a prohibited visual depiction actually moved in interstate commerce. Proof that a defendant used the Internet to receive or possess such an image, standing alone, is insufficient to meet this evidentiary burden.
Facts:
- William Schaefer, a resident of Kansas, used his computer and credit cards to subscribe to websites containing images of child pornography.
- Authorities executed a search warrant at Schaefer's home and seized a desktop computer and two CD-Roms.
- Forensic analysis of the computer revealed images of child pornography in the temporary "Internet cache files" and in the hard drive's "unallocated clusters."
- The two confiscated CDs were found to contain a total of eleven images of child pornography.
- Schaefer admitted to investigators that he had actively sought out child pornography on the Internet.
- The government presented no evidence at trial regarding the geographical location of the websites Schaefer visited, the servers hosting those websites, or the server for Schaefer's own Internet service provider.
- No evidence was introduced to explain how the child pornography images came to be on the two CDs found in Schaefer's possession.
Procedural Posture:
- The United States government charged William Schaefer in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas with one count of receiving and one count of possessing child pornography.
- Schaefer waived his right to a jury trial, proceeding with a bench trial.
- The district court found Schaefer guilty on both counts, basing the possession conviction solely on images found on two CDs.
- The district court sentenced Schaefer to 70 months' imprisonment on each count, to run concurrently.
- Schaefer (appellant) appealed his convictions to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, arguing that the government (appellee) presented insufficient evidence to prove the interstate commerce element of the offenses.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does evidence showing that a defendant used the Internet to receive or possess child pornography, without more, sufficiently prove the jurisdictional element of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a) that the images were 'shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce'?
Opinions:
Majority - Holmes, Circuit Judge.
No. Evidence that a defendant used the Internet, standing alone, is not sufficient to establish that child-pornography images moved across state lines. The plain language of § 2252(a) uses the term 'in commerce,' which requires an actual movement between states, signaling a congressional intent to limit federal jurisdiction rather than exercise its full Commerce Clause power with broader language like 'affecting commerce.' The government must prove this interstate movement as a specific element of the offense. Here, the government failed to introduce any evidence showing the path of the images, such as the location of the websites' servers or the defendant's ISP's servers, and therefore did not meet its burden of proof for either the receipt or possession conviction.
Concurring - Tymkovich, Circuit Judge,
No. While concurring in the judgment, the opinion notes that it is practically certain that any internet transmission crosses state lines. However, the statute requires evidence of such a transmission, and the government failed to provide it. The government did not present readily available evidence, such as server locations, nor did it ask the court to take judicial notice of the interstate nature of internet traffic. This specific evidentiary failure constitutes a plain error requiring reversal, though a future case with a proper request for judicial notice might be decided differently.
Analysis:
This decision establishes a significant evidentiary hurdle for federal prosecutors in the Tenth Circuit in cases involving internet-based child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a). It rejects a per se rule that 'internet use equals interstate commerce' and requires specific, technical proof of the images' path across state lines. The ruling forces the government to be more diligent in its investigations to secure evidence of server locations or data routing to establish federal jurisdiction. While the concurrence suggests the possibility of using judicial notice in future cases, this holding underscores the importance of proving every element of a statute, even those that seem intuitively obvious in the internet age.
Unlock the full brief for United States v. Schaefer