Ross was convicted of possessing child pornography after probation officers found a Samsung Galaxy phone, laptop and external hard drive containing over 1,380 files of child sexual abuse material during a search of his Maine home and vehicle. The search was prompted by a tip from Ross's brother Scott, who told probation that Ross possessed an unauthorized second cell phone in violation of his supervised release conditions from a 2014 child pornography conviction.
Circuit Judge Thompson wrote that even though Ross stipulated the nine files displayed at trial constituted child pornography, the evidence remained probative of whether he knowingly possessed the devices. 'Ross's theory of innocence was that his brother (Scott) framed him and he never touched the devices,' the court noted, explaining that the exhibits demonstrated 'anyone who possessed the cell phone, laptop, and external hard drive for any length of time would immediately recognize that these devices were full of readily accessible child pornography.'
Ross had objected under Federal Rule of Evidence 403 to both the display of the images and agent testimony describing them, arguing the joint stipulation made the evidence unnecessary and unfairly prejudicial. The district court sided with prosecutors, citing precedent from Ross's earlier case that 'a criminal defendant may not stipulate or admit his way out of the full evidentiary force of the case as the government chooses to present it.'
The ruling reinforces prosecutors' broad discretion to present their case even when defendants offer stipulations, particularly in cases where knowledge is disputed. The decision follows established First Circuit precedent that while stipulations prove facts conclusively, they don't automatically strip additional evidence of probative value when core elements like scienter remain contested.