Knowles

concurring:

I concur in the result.

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant William Brook Knowles appeals from his conviction of attempting to persuade, induce or entice a minor to engage in sexual activity ( 18 U.S.C. § 2422 (b)) and interstate travel with intent to engage in sex with a minor ( 18 U.S.C. § 2423 (b)). Knowles argues that the district court erred (1) in admitting ten images depicting child pornography that were found on his laptop computer after his arrest as “other acts” evidence under Fed.R.Evid. 404(b), (2) in excluding evidence pertaining to a polygraph examination, and (3) in failing to require production of an undercover FBI agent’s training materials. Knowles also appeals from his sentence of sixty-three months’ imprisonment, but does not raise any specific issue on appeal pertaining to the imposition of *549 that sentence. We have jurisdiction of his appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

1. “In Internet ‘sting’ cases such as this,” the issue of “what a defendant’s state of mind was immediately prior to his contact with a sexual target purporting to be a minor is routinely a serious point of contention. We call the issue one of ‘predisposition,’ and it is primarily a question of fact.” United…