## Facts

- Law enforcement conducted undercover peer-to-peer investigations and downloaded hundreds of child-pornography images from an IP address in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
- The IP address was linked through subscriber records to the defendant’s father’s account at the residence where the defendant lived.
- Officers executed a search warrant and seized a computer from the defendant’s bedroom; it was actively searching for and downloading files with titles suggestive of child pornography.
- Forensic review found encrypted space and anti-forensic software (including CCleaner and Eraser), and recovered more than 2,800 images and four videos of child pornography from deleted thumbnail cache within a deleted archive in unallocated space.
- A jury convicted the defendant of knowingly distributing child pornography (18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2)) and knowingly possessing child pornography (18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B)).
- The district court imposed 180 months’ imprisonment on each count (concurrent) and 10 years of supervised release, including a two-level obstruction enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove knowing distribution via peer-to-peer software and knowing possession where files were largely found in deleted or unallocated space.
2. Whether admitting automated peer-to-peer software logs without testimony from the investigator who ran the downloads violated the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause.
3. Whether the prosecutor’s rebuttal argument improperly shifted the burden of proof or otherwise constituted reversible misconduct.
4. Whether nondisclosure of grand jury transcripts constituted a Brady violation.
5. Whether the sentence was procedurally unreasonable, including application of U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 (obstruction).
6. Whether the below-Guidelines sentence was substantively unreasonable under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit affirmed the convictions and sentence.
- The evidence supported knowing distribution because peer-to-peer software offered and transmitted files from the residence’s IP address, permitting a reasonable inference that the defendant knowingly shared files.
- The evidence supported knowing possession despite recovery largely from unallocated space, given the quantity of contraband, the computer’s location and use, and evidence of concealment and deletion.
- Admission of software-generated logs did not violate the Confrontation Clause because the logs were machine-generated and non-testimonial.
- The rebuttal argument, considered in context and alongside jury instructions on the government’s burden, did not warrant reversal.
- No Brady violation was shown because the defendant did not establish that undisclosed grand jury transcripts contained material favorable evidence.
- The district court did not clearly err in applying the obstruction enhancement and imposed a procedurally and substantively reasonable sentence.

## Legal Principles

- Sufficiency review asks whether, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, a rational juror could find the elements beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Knowing distribution may be inferred where a defendant uses peer-to-peer software that makes files available to others and actual downloads occur from the defendant’s network location.
- Knowing possession may be supported by circumstantial digital-forensic evidence, including large volumes of illicit material recovered from deleted or unallocated areas, coupled with proof of dominion over the device and conduct consistent with concealment or deletion.
- Machine-generated logs and automated software output, without a human declarant, are generally non-testimonial and do not trigger Confrontation Clause cross-examination requirements.
- Brady requires disclosure of material favorable evidence; speculation that grand jury materials might help the defense is insufficient.
- A § 3C1.1 obstruction enhancement may be upheld where record evidence supports a finding that the defendant took steps intended to conceal or destroy evidence; a below-Guidelines sentence supported by § 3553(a) analysis is ordinarily upheld absent abuse of discretion.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed the defendant’s child-pornography convictions and below-Guidelines sentence, holding that peer-to-peer software logs were non-testimonial, the forensic and circumstantial evidence permitted findings of knowing distribution and possession, and the district court committed no reversible error in trial rulings or sentencing, including the obstruction enhancement.


United States v. Waguespack, 935 F.3d 322 (5th Cir. 2019)