![john lomax john lomax](https://www.abc.net.au/news/image/6646162-3x2-940x627.jpg)
♧ Lomax argues that the fact that 315 “concerning” images were found on his computer was not relevant, and that it was unduly prejudicial, and that it also would not have been properly admitted pursuant to the rules governing “other acts” evidence. 2d 576, 851 N.W.2d 434 (whether error was harmless is a question of law). § 901.03(1) (2017-18)1 (“Error may not be predicated upon a ruling which admits or excludes evidence unless a substantial right of the party is affected. The court’s discretionary decision whether to admit evidence is subject to the harmless error rule, which is a question of law. We will uphold a circuit court’s discretionary decision “if it examined the relevant facts, applied a proper standard of law, and, using a demonstrated rational process, reached a conclusion that a reasonable judge could reach.” Id. Discussion ♦ We review a circuit court’s decision to admit or exclude evidence for an erroneous exercise of discretion. Consistent with the limitations imposed by the circuit court, these two references were limited to the total number of “concerning” images located on Lomax’s computer, from which the 40 charged images were selected. 2018AP2267-CR ♥ The parties identify only two brief references to the 315 “concerning” images during trial. A law enforcement agent discussed each image and explained her basis for concluding that it depicted a child in a sexually explicit manner. Each of these 40 images was admitted as an exhibit and displayed to the jury with a projector. ♤ A significant portion of the State’s case-in-chief focused on the 40 images that were charged in the complaint. The circuit court allowed the State to introduce the testimony, but limited it to the total number of “concerning” images found on the computer and prohibited the State from displaying or describing those images to the jury. He argued that this testimony was not relevant and that it was unduly prejudicial. ♣ During trial, the State sought to introduce testimony that there were 315 “concerning” images discovered in the search of Lomax’s computer, and Lomax objected. Officers identified 315 graphic files on Lomax’s computer that were “concerning,” and from those files, authorities selected 40 images that were charged in the complaint. Background ♢ The child pornography charges against Lomax stem from a search of his computer pursuant to a warrant. We need not and do not decide whether the court erroneously exercised its discretion in allowing this testimony, since we conclude that any error was harmless.
JOHN LOMAX TRIAL
Lomax contends that the circuit court erred by allowing the State to introduce trial testimony that officers identified a total of 315 “concerning” images on Lomax’s computer, since he was charged with possessing only 40 of those images. Lomax appeals a judgment of conviction and sentence for 40 counts of possession of child pornography.
![john lomax john lomax](https://www.phys.ethz.ch/the-department/people/person-detail.person_image.jpeg)
Per curiam opinions may not be cited in any court of this state as precedent or authority, except for the limited purposes specified in WIS. Before Fitzpatrick, P.J., Blanchard and Graham, JJ. APPEAL from a judgment of the circuit court for Sauk County: MICHAEL P. 2014CF55 2018AP2267-CR STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT IV STATE OF WISCONSIN, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, V. A party may file with the Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of Appeals. If published, the official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing. Reiff Clerk of Court of Appeals Appeal No. COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED DecemSheila T.