knowing possession of materials depicting a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct if those materials were shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce, or were produced using materials that have been mailed or shipped or transported by any means including a computer. Maxwell, 386 F.3d at 1052-53. There, we held that the defendant’s mere intrastate possession of images that were saved on disks, which had traveled from out of state before they contained illegal images, was “noneconomic and noncommercial in nature” and did not “substantially affect interstate commerce.” Maxwell, 386 F.3d at 1054, 1067. The Supreme Court, however, recently vacated and remanded Maxwell for further consideration in light of Gonzales v. Raich, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 2195, 162 L.Ed.2d 1 (2005) (<HOLDING>), and therefore it no longer is good law. See
holding that congress may regulate the intrastate noncommercial cultivation possession and use of marijuana as an essential part of a larger regulatory scheme holding that the csa may be unconstitutional as applied to the intrastate noncommercial cultivation possession and use of marijuana for personal medical purposes on the advice of a physician holding that a defendants conviction for two possession of marijuana counts could not be supported by his possession of two marijuana cigarettes dropped from his hand and again for his possession of several packets of marijuana found in a nearby jacket during the same search holding that jurys failure to find the defendant guilty of possession of marijuana could not be reconciled with a verdict of guilty of possession of marijuana with intent to purchase holding that possession of marijuana is not protected by the free exercise clause of the first amendment