At some point, Gallegos said he was convinced the person was a gay man posing as a girl because in the past he had arranged meetings with supposed females only to meet a man.
The reason he showed up at the meeting site, was out of curiosity about this person.
Taliaferro argued that on the Internet people pose as someone they are not all of the time and that it is difficult to tell who you are actually chatting with.
Because of this, Internet chat sometimes turns into fantasy and is not grounded in reality.
In an attempt to have the charge thrown out, 3rd District Judge Stephen Henroid ruled that it didn't matter that Gallegos showed up at the meeting site and that the crime was completed over the Internet.
During oral arguments Wednesday, justices differed as to whether Gallegos' conversation could convict him.
After tracking his license plate number, Gallegos turned himself in.
Gallegos claims he had never believed the person he was chatting with was a minor.
Taliaferro said in her client's case, he was convicted based solely on an Internet chat he claims was purely sexual fantasy.
James Gallegos, of Clearfield, was charged and convicted by a jury of enticing a 13-year-old girl over the Internet. In actuality, the 13-year-old was an adult agent with the Utah Attorney General's Internet Crimes Against Children task force.
At issue is whether or not Utah's Internet Enticement statute is unconstitutional by saying a person engaged in sexual speech over the Internet need only believe they are chatting with a minor in order to be convicted. justice system a person is considered innocent until the state can prove their guilt.