I don't know about you. But if I'm Jeffrey Ziegler in this case, I don't know that I would have filed an appeal.
Ziegler downloads kiddie porn on his computer at work, after using searches for "preteen girls" and "underage girls". His employers catch him and turn him over to the FBI. He eventually enters into a plea bargain and, as a result, the (very serious) child pornography charges against him are dismissed in return for his plea of guilty to receipt of obsence materials. He's sentenced to two years of probation and a $1,000 fine.
No jail time. Probation. A $1,000 fine. A conviction merely for "reciept of obscene materials" -- without any reference to kiddie porn. Seems like a pretty good result to me.
But he decides to appeal. But not only does he lose the appeal, but it also results in a published opinion that informs the world that Ziegler accessed kiddie porn. That his conviction wasn't just downloading rancy sex stuff from the internet, but instead involved underage children.
I'd rather do the probation and pay the $1,000 fine, thank you very much. Even if I had won the appeal. Just don't tell the world what I was downloading at work, please.
Not an appeal I would have filed, I think.
