Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility


Criminal law — Sufficiency of the evidence — Distribution of child pornography

A jury in the Circuit Court for Worcester County convicted Daniel Brynan Kerstetter, the appellant, of seven counts of distribution of child pornography and twenty-one counts of possession of child pornography. He was sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment, all but five years suspended, and three years’ supervised probation upon release. Pursuant to Md. Code (2001, 2008 Repl. Vol., 2015 Supp.), section 11-707 of the Criminal Procedure Article (“Crim. Proc.”), he is required to register as a sex offender for a mandatory term of twenty-five years.

The appellant presents three questions for review, which we have reorganized and rephrased as follows: I. Did the trial court abuse its discretion by permitting the State to amend the indictment on three occasions, over defense counsel’s objections? II. Did the trial court err by allowing the prosecutor to comment during closing argument about the appellant’s failure to call Charles Walters as a witness in his defense? III. Was the evidence legally sufficient to sustain the appellant’s conviction for distribution of child pornography as charged in Count 5 of the indictment?

Read the opinion here: