Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas
CONCURRING OPINION
No. 04-12-00372-CR
Scott Edward WILSON,
Appellant
v.
The STATE of
The STATE of Texas,
Appellee
From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2009-CR-12096
Honorable Lori I. Valenzuela, Judge Presiding
Opinion by: Karen Angelini, Justice
Concurring Opinion by: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice
Marialyn Barnard, Justice
Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Delivered and Filed: November 20, 2013
This case raises issues surrounding the prosecution of possession of child pornography
based on images found in temporary Internet files. Multiple courts have taken varying approaches
to determine whether images in a computer’s temporary cache are sufficient to show knowing or
intentional possession. Those that have chosen to view the “possession” in a cache as sufficient
evidence of possession involved a defendant’s admitted history and practice of viewing child
pornography, along with evidence of the defendant’s exercise of control over the images, i.e.,
copying to a hard drive, zooming in on the images, and purposeful deletion from the computer
cache file. Such telling facts of possession are not found in Wilson’s case. Wilson does, however,
Concurring Opinion 04-12-00372-CR
admit to having viewed images of child pornography while viewing adult pornography. Because
we are to view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, the jury was free to reject
Wilson’s claims and to determine that he intended to possess the child pornography images that
were found in the computer’s temporary cache. Had Wilson not made such admissions, I believe
the record would not support the jury’s finding without additional evidence of Wilson’s intent to,
at a minimum, view and manipulate the illicit images for which he was charged.
For example, there was no evidence of usage patterns under Wilson’s user name to indicate
a history of visiting child pornography websites, or behavior that indicates an intent to view or
otherwise manipulate child pornography. Wilson relies on Moreland 1 for the Fifth Circuit’s
position that where possession is evident only from temporary images found under the appellant’s
computer profile, with nothing more indicated by the appellant’s behavior, the evidence is
insufficient to show intent to possess child pornography.
Here, without Wilson’s admissions contained in the videotape, there are no facts to
evidence an intent to possess the illicit images of children found in the computer’s temporary
internet cache, and in particular, no evidence from which the jury could determine that Wilson had
a history of and present sexual attraction to children. Both the small number of images (ten) and
the brief time frame (five hours in one day) within which the illicit images were automatically
stored in the temporary cache are by themselves insufficient to prove intentional possession of
child pornography without any further definitive “action” on Wilson’s part. That he did not destroy
or attempt to destroy or conceal said images is significant when deciding whether Wilson intended
to possess and control any unlawful image. Further, there is no evidence that Wilson purposefully
visited or subscribed to Internet sites for the express purpose of viewing child pornography, or
1
United States v. Moreland, 665 F.3d 137 (5th Cir. 2011).
-2-
Concurring Opinion 04-12-00372-CR
otherwise behaved in such a way to indicate voluntary conduct leading to the images being stored
in the cache in his computer.
I believe that without Wilson’s admissions, the inferences necessary to establish his guilt
are not reasonable based on the lack of cumulative force of all the evidence considered in the light
most favorable to the verdict. Accordingly, I respectfully decline to join the majority opinion, but
I concur in the court’s judgment.
Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Publish
-3-