Tennille v. State
| Decision Date | 21 November 2005 |
| Docket Number | No. S05A0927.,S05A0927. |
| Citation | 622 S.E.2d 346,279 Ga. 884 |
| Parties | TENNILLE v. The STATE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Ernie M. Sheffield, Bainbridge, Robert Robinson McLendon IV, Blakely, for Appellant.
Joseph Kenneth Mulholland, Asst. Dist. Atty., J. Brown Moseley, for Appellee.
This appeal is from James Tennille's conviction for sexual exploitation of children. A consent search of Tennille's home produced photographs of nude young females from a user-created folder on Tennille's computer titled "2002 side jobs and receipts." Based on the computer photographic files, Tennille was indicted on 21 counts of sexual exploitation of children in violation of OCGA § 16-12-100(b)(8).1 After denying a motion to dismiss based on the asserted unconstitutionality of the statute, the trial court conducted a bench trial at which an expert witness testified that the persons depicted in the photographs taken from Tennille's computer were under the age of 18. The trial court found Tennille guilty on 12 counts.
1. Tennille contends OCGA § 16-12-100 is unconstitutional because it denies persons charged under the statute effective assistance of counsel, a fair trial, due process, and equal protection of the law. The basis for Tennille's claim is that subsection (d)2, which exempts 34;the activities of law enforcement and prosecution agencies in the investigation and prosecution of criminal offenses...." from application of subsection (b), where the proscribed conduct is set out, does not have a comparable exemption for defense counsel and expert witnesses for the defense. This absence, he asserts, prevents meaningful access to the material on which the charges against him are based.
Tennille's attack on the statute runs aground on a basic principle: Agan v. State, 272 Ga. 540(1), 533 S.E.2d 60 (2000). Tennille cannot show the statute adversely impacted his rights because he made no effort to obtain what he contends the statute forbids him. He does not allege and the record does not show that he asked for access to the materials seized from his home for the purpose of preparing for trial. By contrast, when the effect of similar exemptions in similar criminal statutes has come under scrutiny in several other states, it has been in the context of efforts by the defense to obtain the contraband at the heart of the prosecution, and courts in those states have crafted means by which the defense can have meaningful access to the materials at issue. See State v. Butler, 2005 WL 735080 (Tenn.Crim. App.,2005); State v. Second Jud. Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 254, 89 P.3d 663 (2004); Cervantes v. Cates, 206 Ariz. 178, 76 P.3d 449 (2003); Westerfield v. Superior Court, 99 Cal.App.4th 994, 121 Cal.Rptr.2d 402 (2002).
Because Tennille can show no actual impact on him of the statute's failure to provide expressly for an exemption from its terms for the defense in a criminal prosecution, he lacks standing to challenge the constitutionality of the statute on that ground. Horton v. State, 251 Ga.App. 796(2), 554 S.E.2d 812 (2001).
2. Tennille contends the evidence adduced at trial was not sufficient to support...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mason v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
...in some way by the operation of the statute or that the statute has an adverse impact on the plaintiff's rights. Tennille v. State, 279 Ga. 884, 885, 622 S.E.2d 346 (2005); Agan v. State, 272 Ga. 540(1), 533 S.E.2d 60 (2000); State of Ga. v. Jackson, 269 Ga. 308(1), 496 S.E.2d 912 (1998); A......
-
Atlanta Taxicab Co. Owners Ass'n v. Atlanta
...statute, ordinance, or administrative action, or that the statute has an adverse impact on that party's rights. See Tennille v. State, 279 Ga. 884, 885, 622 S.E.2d 346 (2005); Agan v. State, 272 Ga. 540, 542(1), 533 S.E.2d 60 (2000); State v. Jackson, 269 Ga. 308, 310, 496 S.E.2d 912 (1998)......
-
New v. State
...evidence of the defendant's “knowledge of the content of those images,” making any lack of knowledge of the web cache operation irrelevant). 33.Tennille v. State, 279 Ga. 884, 885(2), 622 S.E.2d 346 (2005). 34. A review of the transcript and the discussion conducted outside the jury's prese......
-
Abernathy v. State
...state had presented expert testimony that the persons depicted in the photographs were under the age of 18 years. Tennille v. State, 279 Ga. 884, 885(2), 622 S.E.2d 346 (2005). Other courts addressing this issue have acknowledged that in some instances involving postpubescent teenagers, exp......
-
The Fourth Amendment and Computers
...United States v. Vilar, No. S3 05-CR-621 (KMK), 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26993, at *117 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 5, 2007). [58] See Tennille v. State, 279 Ga. 884, 884, 622 S.E.2d 346, 347 (2005) (defendant kept photographs of nude females in a user-created folder titled "2002 side jobs and receipts"). ......