United States v. Woods

Citation23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 1182,88 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 970,684 F.3d 1045
Decision Date18 June 2012
Docket NumberNo. 11–11665.,11–11665.
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff–Appellee, v. Morgan Chase WOODS, Defendant–Appellant.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Brian Tanner, James D. Durham, James C. Stuchell, Edward J. Tarver, U.S. Attys., Savannah, GA, Edmund A. Booth, Jr., Carlton R. Bourne, Jr., Nancy Greenwood, Patricia Green Rhodes, U.S. Attys., Augusta, GA, for PlaintiffAppellee.

Richard H. Goolsby, The Goolsby Law Firm, LLC, Augusta, GA, for DefendantAppellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia.

Before TJOFLAT, HULL and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Defendant Morgan Chase Woods appeals his convictions on one count of receipt of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(2), and two counts of possession of child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(5)(B). After review and oral argument, we affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

Defendant Morgan Chase Woods was a Navy serviceman working as an Arabic linguist and stationed at Fort Gordon, Georgia. In early 2008, his ex-wife discovered child pornography on a Hewlett–Packard (“H–P”) computer that had belonged to Woods before she took the computer and moved out of their home. In February 2008, Woods's ex-wife turned the H–P computer over to the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (“NCIS”). Forensic investigators discovered images of known child pornography on the computer.

A. May 12, 2009 Interview

On May 12, 2009, NCIS Special Agent Mary Beth Eversman, FBI Agent Brian Ozden and National Security Agency Special Agent Steve Cutcliff interviewed Woods. The interview took place at Woods's Fort Gordon workplace during his working hours. It began when Woods's chief escorted him to a private office where the agents had gathered. After Woods's chief left, the agents displayed their credentials and told Woods that they wanted to speak to him because his email address had been associated with a child pornography website. 1 The agents did not intend to take Woods into custody at this time; the agents did not handcuff Woods, and they did not tell Woods that he was under arrest. The agents were not armed. Agent Eversman later testified that Woods was free to leave or to refuse to speak to them. Woods gave no indication that he did not want to speak with the agents.

Before questioning Woods, the agents gave Woods a form entitled “Military Suspect's Acknowledgment and Waiver of Rights.” Agent Eversman later testified that pursuant to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the military must provide this waiver form to every military suspect in advance of interviewing the suspect about allegations against him, even if the suspect is not in custody. The waiver form, which Agent Eversman read aloud to Woods, stated:

I ... Morgan Chase Woods ... have been advised by Special Agent(s) Mary Beth Eversman and Brian Ozden that I am suspected of receipt and/or transfer of child pornography.

I have also been advised that:

(1) I have the right to remain silent and make no statement at all;

(2) Any statement I do make can be used against me in a trial by court-martial or other judicial or administrative proceeding;

(3) I have the right to consult with a lawyer prior to any questioning. This lawyer may be a civilian lawyer retained by me at no cost to the United States, a military lawyer appointed to act as my counsel at no cost to me, or both;

(4) I have the right to have my retained civilian lawyer and/or appointed military lawyer present during this interview; and

(5) I may terminate this interview at any time, for any reason.

I understand my rights as related to me and as set forth above. With that understanding, I have decided that I do not desire to remain silent, consult with a retained or appointed lawyer, or have a lawyer present at this time. I make this decision freely and voluntarily. No threats or promises have been made to me.

After reading the form, Agent Eversman asked Woods if he had any questions. Woods had no questions. Agent Eversman then asked Woods to indicate that he understood his rights by initialing next to each numbered paragraph on the form. Woods initialed each of the numbered paragraphs on the waiver form. In addition, both Woods and Agent Eversman signed the bottom of the waiver form. Then, Agent Eversman asked Woods to read the last paragraph of the form and asked Woods whether he would be willing to talk with her. Woods said yes. Woods never asked for a lawyer before or during the interview.

The agents did not tell Woods that he would not be prosecuted if he cooperated. Agent Ozden testified that the agents made no threats, inducements or promises. Woods admitted that the agents made no promises to him at the time the agents advised Woods of his rights. However, Woods later testified that he was “flustered” at the time he signed the waiver form.

After signing the waiver form, Woods told the agents that he had viewed child pornography on his desktop computer at his current home but had received the child pornography inadvertently. Woods told the agents that he and his now ex-wife had used a different computer at their former home.2 The interview lasted approximately 30 minutes.

B. Search of Woods's Home and Computer

During the May 12, 2009 interview, the agents asked for Woods's consent to search his home computer. Woods agreed and signed a consent form entitled “Permissive Authorization for Search and Seizure.” That consent form authorized Agents Eversman and Ozden to search Woods's residence “and any computers and/or electronic storage media located within [Woods's] residence.” The consent form further authorized the NCIS “to conduct forensic reviews ... of all electronic storage media and data files, to include text and graphical image files, contained on the electronic storage media.”

After signing the consent form, Woods drove his car to his home and let the agents follow in a separate vehicle. Woods allowed Agent Ozden to access his home computer, and Ozden found images of child pornography. Agent Ozden then asked Woods what Woods thought Ozden had found on the computer. Woods stated that he thought Agent Ozden had found child pornography. The agents told Woods that they would like to take the computer for further forensic examination. Woods agreed and signed another consent form. Agent Eversman then brought Woods's home computer to the NCIS evidence facility, where it was shipped to the Defense Computer Forensic Lab (“DCFL”) for forensic analysis.

C. Forensic Examination of Woods's Computers

DCFL examiners found numerous images of child pornography and one video of child pornography on the home computer Woods turned over to Agents Eversman and Ozden. Hundreds of these images matched images of known child pornography catalogued in the database maintained by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (“NCMEC”). Agent Eversman selected several of the images that matched images in the NCMEC database for in-depth analysis. Through in-depth analysis, NCIS investigators attempt to determine images' names3 and origins, when the images were saved to a computer, and whether the images were copied or transferred to another computer.

DCFL performed an identical analysis on the H–P computer that Woods's ex-wife turned over to NCIS. Forty-one of the images and one video discovered on the H–P computer matched images of known child pornography in the NCMEC database. From these matching images, an NCIS agent selected six images for in-depth analysis.

The in-depth analyses of the images retrieved from the two computers showed that the H–P user downloaded images of child pornography onto the H–P computer at various times and saved those images in obscure folders on the H–P computer. The H–P user then copied all of these images to Woods's new home computer in June 2007 and attempted to delete the images from the H–P computer around or after December 2007. The filenames of at least some of the images recovered from the two computers included obvious references to the depiction of pre-pubescent victims.4

D. July 16, 2009 Interview and Written Confession

Agent Eversman and NCIS Special Agent Noah Williams interviewed Woods for a second time on July 16, 2009. This interview took place at the Army's Criminal Investigation Division office at Fort Gordon.

Before the interview, Agent Eversman again read the “Military Suspect's Acknowledgment and Waiver of Rights” form to Woods. The waiver form acknowledged that the agents advised Woods that he was suspected of “receipt and/or transfer of child pornography.” After agreeing to waive his rights, Woods signed the form and initialed each paragraph of the form. The waiver form was identical to the one Woods signed on May 12, 2009. Woods did not ask any questions about the waiver and never asked for a lawyer. The agents did not tell Woods that he was under arrest before the interview and did not restrain Woods. The interview lasted approximately two hours. According to Agent Eversman, the tone of the interview was professional and non-confrontational.

After the interview, Agent Eversman told Woods that she needed to document their discussion, and invited Woods to help her prepare a written statement to ensure its accuracy. Woods agreed, and Agent Eversman typed the statement on a laptop computer as Woods sat beside her. Woods could see what Agent Eversman was typing, and at times Woods provided input with respect to the substance and language of the statement. Woods then edited a printed copy of the four-page statement. The printed statement shows that Woods struck and replaced certain words and added phrases to the statement. Woods initialed beside each paragraph and signed the bottom. In the statement, Woods acknowledged making the statement “of [his] own free will and without any threats made to [him] or promises extended.”

Woods's statement affirmed that he...

To continue reading

Request your trial
86 cases
  • Wilson v. State
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 21 Junio 2021
    ...at 798 (concluding that evidence admitted under federal Rule 414 must also meet the requirements of Rule 403 ); United States v. Woods , 684 F.3d 1045, 1064 (11th Cir. 2012) (same); McGarity , 669 F.3d at 1244 n.32 (same); see also United States v. Jones, 748 F.3d 64, 70 (1st Cir. 2014) (sa......
  • United States v. Mumpower, Case No.: 3:08cr22/LAC/EMT
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Florida
    • 20 Octubre 2016
    ...or encourages seriously discriminatory enforcement." United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285, 304 (2008); United States v. Woods, 684 F.3d 1045, 1057 (11th Cir. 2012); United States v. Wayerski, 624 F.3d 1342, 1347 (11th Cir. 2010). A statute is facially overbroad if it prohibits a substant......
  • United States v. Moran
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • 17 Febrero 2015
    ...care kickbacks, are multiplicitous. We review defendants' preserved challenges to the indictment de novo. United States v. Woods, 684 F.3d 1045, 1060 n. 14 (11th Cir.2012). Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12, challenges to the indictment not raised before trial are waived. Fed.R.Cr......
  • United States v. Moran
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • 17 Febrero 2015
    ...care kickbacks, are multiplicitous. We review defendants' preserved challenges to the indictment de novo. United States v. Woods, 684 F.3d 1045, 1060 n. 14 (11th Cir.2012). Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12, challenges to the indictment not raised before trial are waived. Fed.R.Cr......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT