People v. James D. Kent

970 N.E.2d 833 (2012)

From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

People v. James D. Kent

New York Court of Appeals
970 N.E.2d 833 (2012)

  • Written by Sharon Feldman, JD

Facts

While responding to a complaint by professor James Kent (defendant) about his malfunctioning computer, a college employee discovered a folder containing photographs of scantily clad young girls in suggestive poses. The hard drive was submitted to the police. Images from child-pornography websites, including “School Backyard,” were found in the cache—temporary Internet files automatically stored on the user’s computer when websites are visited. The computer’s unallocated space—comprising material that had been downloaded, saved, and deleted and was no longer accessible to Kent—contained child-pornography photographs and a video saved under the name “Arina.” Kent was convicted of promoting and possessing sexual performances by a child. The counts related to the procurement and possession of the “School Backyard” webpage, the procurement and possession of the “Arina” video, and the possession of the images in the unallocated space. There was no evidence that Kent was aware of his computer’s cache function or that the files were in the cache. The New York Appellate Division affirmed Kent’s convictions, holding that the cache was evidence that Kent had possessed the materials when he viewed them. On appeal, Kent argued that merely accessing and displaying website images did not constitute promotion of child pornography; only the possession of tangible items was unlawful; and absent proof he was aware of his computers’ cache function, he could not have knowingly possessed items stored in the cache.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Ciparick, J.)

Concurrence (Smith, J.)

Concurrence (Graffeo, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 797,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 797,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 797,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership