In Tecklenburg v. Appellate Division (2009) 169 Cal.App.4th 1402, the defendant repeatedly searched the Internet for child pornography and he viewed those pornographic images on his computers. The court noted he was "manipulating the display of such images on his computer screen" and "enlarged some of the images from thumbnail views." (Ibid.) Because he "knowingly possessed or controlled images of child pornography" on his computer, he violated the statute. (Ibid.) There "was no need for additional evidence that defendant was aware of the TIF's or cache in order for defendant to have violated section 311.11, subdivision (a)." (Ibid.) The Tecklenburg holding is consistent with the statute. "By its plain terms, section 311.11 includes an image of child pornography as it is displayed on a computer screen as an object that can be knowingly possessed or controlled." (Tecklenburg v. Appellate Division, supra, 169 Cal.App.4th at p. 1418.) "We conclude defendant here knowingly possessed or controlled images of child pornography in violation of section 311.11, subdivision (a), because the evidence ... demonstrates defendant intentionally used his home and work computers to find, access, and peruse through quantities of child pornography, manipulating the display of such images on his computer screen." (Id. at p. 1419.)