U.S. v. McClain, 71 M.J. 80

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Crimes: Art. 134 - Miscellaneous -- Clause 1, Clause 2, or Clause 3 Pre-2019 offenses

1. the evidence in this case was legally sufficient to sustain appellant’s conviction for possessing child pornography in violation of Article 134, UCMJ, where (1) appellant’s own statement, admitted into evidence and sufficiently corroborated by other evidence, provided direct evidence that he intentionally sought pornography on the Internet using a Limewire software program that he installed on his computer, knowingly downloaded what he thought were videos containing child pornography, and then viewed those videos, (2) where a CID agent testified that when he showed appellant the names of the four video files that were found saved in a shared folder on appellant’s computer, appellant admitted that he had downloaded those files to his computer, and (3) where an NCIS agent also testified that the characteristics of the files he found in the shared folder on appellant’s computer were identical with the characteristics of four videos admitted into evidence of suspected child pornography that he downloaded from a Limewire share folder, including the fact that they had the same title, they were the same size files, they were the same type of file (i.e., videos), and they shared the same SHA1 value (digital signature); based on this evidence, including every reasonable inference that can be drawn from the evidence when viewed in the light most favorable to the government, a rational trier of fact could find the essential elements of the charged offense of possession of child pornography beyond a reasonable doubt despite the fact that the four video files of suspected child pornography on appellant’s computer could not be downloaded or viewed

Core Criminal Law Subjects: Evidence: Confessions and Admissions › Corroboration

1. the standard for corroboration is very low; corroborating evidence must raise only an inference of truth as to the essential facts admitted; this inference may be drawn from a quantum of corroborating evidence that has been described as very slight

Trial Stages: Appeals: Standards of Review, Burdens, etc.

1. an appellate court reviews issues of legal sufficiency of the evidence de novo
2. evidence is legally sufficient if, viewed in the light most favorable to the government, a rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt; in applying this test, an appellate court draws every reasonable inference from the evidence of record in favor of the prosecution