Child Pornography Charges in Collin County: State and Federal

A child pornography charge in Collin County usually arrives with a search warrant, a seized phone or computer, and a detective who would like to talk. What happens next depends on which statute you are charged under, how the material was counted, and the quality of the forensic work on both sides.

Kent Starr has practiced criminal defense since 1997 and represents people charged in state and federal court, and he takes these cases throughout Texas. This page explains what Texas Penal Code §43.26 says, what it carries after the September 1, 2025 rewrite, when a case goes federal, and what the defense actually looks at. The consultation is free and confidential, and Kent takes it himself. Call (214) 982-1408.

How Texas Penal Code 43.26 Defines the Offense

The statute is titled “Possession or Promotion of Child Pornography.” Prosecutors and forensic examiners increasingly call the same material child sexual abuse material, and you will hear both terms in a Collin County courtroom. It describes “visual material” that depicts a child younger than 18 engaging in sexual conduct, and it punishes possessing, accessing with intent to view, or promoting that material.

Under Section 43.26, as rewritten by the Legislature effective September 1, 2025, a person commits possession by knowingly or intentionally possessing, or accessing with intent to view, visual material depicting a child younger than 18 engaging in sexual conduct, when the person knew or should have known that the material depicts a child. Three parts of that sentence matter most:

• Possess, or access with intent to view. Physical possession is not required. Accessing material online with intent to view it is covered, which is why browser history and caches show up in these prosecutions.
• Knew or should have known. The State does not have to prove you were certain the person depicted was under 18, only that you knew or should have known the material depicts a child.
• Visual material. The 2025 rewrite added “a file in any digital format” to the definition, so the term reaches files on a phone, inside apps, and in cloud accounts, not only printed pictures or film.

The rewrite also created a separate offense for material depicting a “computer-generated child,” meaning material virtually indistinguishable from an image of an actual child, and it added a rebuttable presumption that a depicted child is an actual child. A rebuttable presumption can be contested with evidence, and whether the State can rely on it becomes a live question in cases involving edited, generated, or ambiguous material.

The statute’s own defenses are narrow: limited defenses for specified official duties and for certain school-administrator handling of material under Section 43.261, and, for computer-generated material only, a person not more than two years older than the child depicted. Texas law has no defense for possessing a small number of images and deleting or reporting them. That defense exists only in federal law, discussed below.

What Possession Carries After September 1, 2025

Before the 2025 session, Texas graded possession by image count in tiers of fewer than 100, 100 to 499, and 500 or more, a structure that dated to September 1, 2023. Senate Bill 1621 replaced those tiers with far lower thresholds. The new grading is prospective: conduct on or after September 1, 2025 is judged under the new tiers, and earlier conduct under the earlier version. Which version applies is one of the first questions Kent asks, because the same files can land in a different felony degree depending on the alleged date.

For possession of material depicting an actual child, the current statute reads:

• Third-degree felony as the baseline: 2 to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.
• Second-degree felony (2 to 20 years) if the person has one prior conviction under Section 43.26, or the material involves 10 to 49 depictions.
• First-degree felony (5 to 99 years or life) if the person has two or more prior convictions, or the material involves 50 or more depictions, or it depicts conduct that would be sexual assault of a child under Section 22.011(a)(2), regardless of the count.

Two further rules sit on top of those tiers. If any child depicted is younger than 10, a third-degree or second-degree case moves up one category, and a first-degree case carries a 15-year minimum. Separate, higher ranges apply to certain child-care employees and to display of the material in a school library. Material depicting a computer-generated child is graded on its own ladder, starting at a state jail felony (180 days to 2 years in a state jail facility).

Promotion is punished more severely than possession, and the 2025 amendments layered further enhancements on it. Two bills passed in the same session touched that part of the statute, so Kent reads the promotion tier against your indictment and the version in force on the alleged date rather than quoting a number here.

Registration, Probation, and the Statute of Limitations

Registration. Section 43.26 is on the list of offenses that require lifetime sex-offender registration under Chapter 62 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Registration follows a “reportable conviction or adjudication,” and deferred adjudication counts. See what registration means day to day in Texas.

Probation. A judge cannot place a person convicted under Section 43.26 on community supervision; Article 42A.054 takes that option off the table. Deferred adjudication is not barred by statute for this offense, so it can be part of a negotiated resolution in some cases. But it still requires registration.

Time limits. The State has seven years to bring a charge under Section 43.26 (Code of Criminal Procedure Article 12.01). That matters when the material dates back years or a device sat unexamined for a long stretch.

Priors. Prior 43.26 convictions raise the tier, and a 43.26 conviction is a listed prior under Penal Code 12.42(c)(2) that makes a later conviction for indecency with a child by contact, sexual assault, or aggravated sexual assault an automatic life sentence. The Collin County sex crimes defense page covers those offenses.

The New AI Statute, Penal Code 43.235

Alongside the 43.26 rewrite, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 20, which created Penal Code Section 43.235, effective September 1, 2025. It reaches obscene visual material that appears to depict a child younger than 18 engaging in sexual conduct, whether the image is of an actual child, a cartoon or animation, or AI-generated. It also makes it an offense to use an actual child’s image to train an AI model. Possessing, accessing, or promoting such material is a state jail felony, rising to a third-degree felony with one prior conviction and a second-degree felony with two or more.

The gap this fills is drawings, animations, and generated images that are obscene but may not depict a real, identifiable child. Which statute the State charges drives the punishment range.

When the Case Goes Federal

The same conduct can be charged in federal court under 18 U.S.C. §2252 and §2252A. Receipt or distribution carries a mandatory minimum of five years and a maximum of 20, or 15 to 40 years with a qualifying prior. Possession carries up to 10 years, or up to 20 if any depicted minor was prepubescent or under 12, and 10 to 20 years with a prior. Federal law also contains an affirmative defense that Texas law does not: possessing fewer than three images and promptly, in good faith, destroying them or reporting them to law enforcement without allowing anyone else to access them. That defense exists only in federal court. It does not apply to a Texas charge.

Federal cases arising in Collin County are heard in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division, which holds court in Sherman and Plano. Whether a case is filed in state or federal court is a charging decision. Cases opened by a federal agency such as Homeland Security Investigations or the FBI, or referred through the Internet Crimes Against Children task force, can be filed federally, as can cases involving distribution or large volumes of material. A case that starts as a local search warrant can still be adopted federally after the forensic exam. Kent represents people charged in state and federal court; the federal crimes page covers how a federal prosecution differs.

How These Cases Start in Collin County

Many of these investigations begin not with a report from a person but with a technology company. Email providers, cloud storage services, and social apps scan uploads against databases of known material and send matches to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, whose CyberTipline forwards the report to law enforcement in the area tied to the account or IP address. In Collin County that report typically lands with a local police department or the Internet Crimes Against Children task force, which obtains subscriber information from the internet provider, gets a search warrant, and comes to the home.

The search warrant is usually the first moment the person learns of the investigation. Officers often arrive early, secure the house, seize the devices in it, and ask the person to step outside for a “conversation.” That conversation is an interview. In other cases the approach is a “knock and talk” without a warrant, where officers ask for consent to look at devices, or a detective calls later and asks the person to come in and explain. Each approach may involve requests for a statement, device access, or consent to search, and each is a point where having a lawyer changes what happens next. The posts on what to do when police arrive with a search warrant and what happens after police say they found material on your phone walk through those first hours. If the investigation reached you through CPS or a detective’s interview request instead, the CPS and police investigation page covers that path.

After a seizure, the devices go to a forensic lab, and that can take months. Charges may be filed at the time of the search, or the person may go home and hear nothing until an arrest warrant issues after the exam. In state court, a felony case is presented to a grand jury and, if indicted, heard in the district courts at the Russell A. Steindam Courts Building in McKinney. The Collin County criminal defense guide covers bond and the courts.

What the Defense Actually Looks At

Nothing on this page is meant to make the material sound smaller than it is. The people who prosecute it in Collin County treat it seriously, and so does Kent. The defense in a 43.26 case is not about the nature of the material. It is about whether the State can prove each element against this person, with evidence that was lawfully obtained and correctly analyzed:

• Knowing possession. Files in a browser cache, temporary folders, unallocated space, or an automated download queue raise the question of whether the person ever knew they were there. Where a file sits, when it was created, and whether it was ever opened are forensic questions with real answers.
• Attribution. Shared computers, family devices, roommates, poorly secured Wi-Fi, and accounts used by more than one person all bear on who possessed what. An IP address identifies an internet connection; linking activity to a particular person takes more than that.
• The forensic work itself. The defense can retain an independent examiner to image the devices, review the hash analysis the State relied on, and check whether the State examiner’s conclusions match the underlying data.
• Count methodology. Under the new tiers, the difference between 9 and 10 depictions, or 49 and 50, is a felony degree. How the State counted duplicates, thumbnails, fragments, and files that were never viewable is now a central question.
• Age, and the presumption. Whether the material depicts a child, whether it depicts an actual child, and whether the person knew or should have known are all elements, and each can be contested.
• The warrant and the search. Whether the affidavit supported probable cause, whether the search stayed within the warrant’s scope, whether any consent was voluntary, and whether statements were taken lawfully all feed motions to suppress.
• Chain of custody. Devices pass through several hands between the front door and the courtroom, and gaps in that record matter.
• Which version of the statute applies. The 2025 rewrite is prospective, so the alleged date controls the tiers.

What to Do Now

• Do not consent to any search beyond what the warrant authorizes. Keep your copy of the warrant and the property receipt.
• Do not unlock a device or provide a passcode, PIN, or fingerprint until a lawyer has reviewed the warrant and told you what it requires. Do not provide access until counsel has reviewed the warrant and advised you.
• Do not delete, wipe, factory-reset, or alter anything, on the devices officers left behind or in any account. Preserve the devices and accounts without altering them.
• Do not talk to the detective, and do not attend a scheduled interview, without counsel. The polite answer is that you would like to speak with your attorney first.
• Do not discuss the case with anyone but your lawyer, including family and friends who mean well, and do not post about it online. Jail calls are recorded.
• Call. A spouse or parent is welcome to make the first call; if Kent is retained, the client is the person facing the charge regardless of who pays. The accused of child molestation page explains how family calls work.

How Kent Works

Kent Starr is a solo lawyer. The person you meet at the consultation is the person who reads the forensic report, argues the suppression motion, and tries the case if it comes to that. He has practiced criminal defense since 1997 and represents people charged in state and federal court. His office is in McKinney, the county seat, and he also represents people facing these charges elsewhere in Texas. These cases turn on early work: obtaining the warrant and affidavit, and putting an independent examiner on a forensic image of the devices so the evidence can be reviewed promptly and independently. They also require honest conversation. Kent will tell you what the evidence shows and what each path carries, including registration, even when the answer is hard to hear.

The consultation is free and confidential, Kent takes it himself, and you do not have to explain anything on the phone to schedule it. Call (214) 982-1408.

Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Every case is evaluated on its own facts.

ADVERTISEMENT. This site is attorney advertising. Kent Starr is responsible for the content of this website. Information provided here is general and is not legal advice; reading this page does not create an attorney-client relationship.