Circumstantial Possession and 600-Image Enhancement Affirmed: United States v. Snow

Introduction

United States v. Christopher Snow is a January 8, 2025 decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. In this appeal, the defendant, Christopher Snow, challenged (1) the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions for distribution and possession of child pornography under 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2)(A) and § 2252A(a)(5)(B), (2) the district court’s application of a five-level Sentencing Guidelines enhancement for possession of more than 600 images under U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2(b)(7)(D), and (3) the substantive reasonableness of his 240-month term of imprisonment. The Eleventh Circuit considered whether circumstantial evidence from computer hard drives, caches, unallocated spaces and a cell phone sufficed to support the convictions, whether Snow forfeited his sentencing objection, and whether the within-guidelines sentence complied with 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The court affirmed on all counts.

Summary of the Judgment

The panel issued a per curiam opinion affirming both convictions and the sentence. On the sufficiency question, the court held that:

Circumstantial evidence—images found in allocated spaces on two computers, in caches and unallocated spaces, and on a phone in Snow’s possession—was sufficient to prove “knowing” possession and distribution.
Snow’s failure to move for judgment of acquittal in the district court limited review to whether a manifest miscarriage of justice occurred; no such miscarriage was shown.

On sentencing, the court held that:

Snow forfeited any challenge to the five-level enhancement under § 2G2.2(b)(7)(D) by not objecting below; review was for plain error, which was not shown.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing a 240-month sentence; it considered the Guidelines range, § 3553(a) factors and did not base its decision on improper considerations.

Analysis

1. Precedents Cited

The court drew on a long line of Eleventh Circuit authority governing:

Sufficiency of Evidence: United States v. Hamblin, 911 F.2d 551 (11th Cir. 1990) (standard on judgment of acquittal); United States v. Mieres-Borges, 919 F.2d 652 (11th Cir. 1990); United States v. Bell, 678 F.2d 547 (5th Cir. 1982) (test does not require ruling out all reasonable hypotheses); United States v. Mendez, 528 F.3d 811 (11th Cir. 2008) (circumstantial evidence must permit reasonable inferences).
Definition of “Knowingly Receive”: United States v. Pruitt, 638 F.3d 763 (11th Cir. 2011) (viewing, acquiring, or accepting child pornography on a computer from an outside source constitutes receipt).
Possession and Distribution Elements: United States v. Woods, 684 F.3d 1045 (11th Cir. 2012); United States v. Woodruff, 296 F.3d 1041 (11th Cir. 2002).
Sentencing Guidelines Enhancement: U.S.S.G. § 2G2.2(b)(7)(D) and Application Note 6(B)(ii); United States v. Carpenter, 803 F.3d 1224 (11th Cir. 2015) (treating each video as 75 images).
Plain-Error Review: United States v. Vandergrift, 754 F.3d 1303 (11th Cir. 2014); United States v. Ramirez-Flores, 743 F.3d 816 (11th Cir. 2014).
Substantive Reasonableness: Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007); United States v. Rosales-Bruno, 789 F.3d 1249 (11th Cir. 2015); United States v. Irey, 612 F.3d 1160 (11th Cir. 2010).

Notably, Snow cited out-of-circuit decisions (Dobbs, Moreland) critical of lower-court treatments of cached or unallocated files, but the Eleventh Circuit declined to depart from its own binding precedent (Pruitt, Woods).

2. Legal Reasoning

The court’s reasoning unfolded in three steps:

Sufficiency of Evidence: Under Hamblin and related cases, the panel asked whether—viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution—a reasonable jury could find every element beyond a reasonable doubt. The court concluded that:
- Snow’s account was linked to images found on two computers in his locked room (bearing his name) and a cell phone seized from him.
- Allocated files alone would suffice; additional images in caches or unallocated space bolstered the inference of knowing possession.
- Testimony connecting Snow’s accounts, device ownership and visual similarity of images permitted reasonable inferences of possession and distribution.
Sentencing Enhancement: The court reviewed for plain error because Snow did not object below. The five-level enhancement under § 2G2.2(b)(7)(D) applies when more than 600 images are involved. Pursuant to Application Note 6(B)(ii), each of Snow’s 20 videos counted as 75 images, producing a total well above 600. Snow’s own sentencing memorandum acknowledged “more than 600 images,” foreclosing any plain error.
Substantive Reasonableness: Applying the abuse-of-discretion standard, the court confirmed that the district court properly calculated the Guidelines, considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors (seriousness, deterrence, protection of the public, etc.), and did not rely on an improper factor. The within-range 240-month sentence did not create an unwarranted disparity, and the district court was entitled to give significant weight to the Guidelines.

3. Impact

United States v. Snow reinforces several important principles in child-pornography jurisprudence:

Circumstantial Evidence Counts: Files found in caches and unallocated spaces on a device, when tied to a user’s account and physical possession, may support “knowing” possession or distribution. This closes a potential loophole for offenders who attempt to delete or obscure files.
Video-to-Image Conversion: Application Note 6(B)(ii)’s 75-image count per video is reaffirmed. Offenders carrying numerous short clips or videos face the same severe enhancement as those who store large image collections.
Forfeiture of Sentencing Objections: Defendants must raise guideline objections at the district level or face plain-error review, which sets a high bar for relief.
Guidelines Reliance: Even as critics call for amendment of § 2G2.2, district courts remain bound to apply the current Guidelines absent formal Commission changes.

Complex Concepts Simplified

Circumstantial Evidence: Indirect proof (e.g., device logs, file locations) that allows a factfinder to draw reasonable conclusions; does not require direct eye-witness testimony.
Allocated vs. Unallocated Space: Allocated space holds files the operating system recognizes as belonging to a user. Unallocated space and caches store remnants of deleted or temporary files. Both can reveal user activity.
Plain-Error Review: Appellate review for errors that were not objected to at trial. Defendant must show the error is obvious, affects substantial rights, and seriously undermines fairness.
§ 3553(a) Factors: Statutory criteria guiding sentencing, including seriousness of the offense, need for deterrence, protection of the public, defendant’s history, and avoiding unwarranted disparities.
Sentencing Enhancement: An upward adjustment in the Sentencing Guidelines offense level when certain aggravating factors (e.g., number of images) are present.

Conclusion

United States v. Snow affirms the Eleventh Circuit’s consistent approach to child-pornography cases: circumstantial evidence from digital devices suffices to prove possession and distribution, videos are converted into image-counts for guideline enhancements, and sentencing challenges must be preserved below. The decision bolsters law enforcement’s ability to prosecute efforts to hide illicit material in hidden or deleted file areas, underscores the binding nature of current Sentencing Guidelines, and confirms that within-range sentences addressing serious sexual offenses against children will be upheld as reasonable.