North Carolina Lawyers Weekly
U.S. v. Mills (Lawyers Weekly No. 001-064-17, 12 pp.) (Thacker, J.) No. 15-4325, March 15, 2017; USDC at Raleigh, N.C. (Flanagan, J.) 4th Cir.
Holding: A defendant who twice previously was convicted of taking indecent liberties with children committed “sexual exploitation of children” under 18 U.S.C. § 2251(e) and the prior convictions could be used to enhance his current sentence for manufacturing child pornography; the 4th Circuit affirms defendant’s 45-year prison sentence.
When police executed a search warrant on defendant’s home in 2014, they uncovered 125 videos and 924 still images produced by defendant portraying the sexual exploitation of children. Defendant used at least 10 different children to make the images. He paid several of the children to have sex with him and other males. Defendant also possessed over 10,000 additional images of child pornography and over 100,000 images of child erotica and adult pornography. He pled guilty to one count of criminal information charging him with manufacturing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2251(a), (d).
Criminal History
Defendant’s relevant criminal history included two prior convictions for violating a North Carolina statute on taking indecent liberties with children statute. The district court determined these convictions related to the “sexual exploitation of children” pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2251(e), allowing enhancement of defendant’s sentence.
Because defendant failed to object to the sentencing enhancement in the district court, we review for plain error. He argues that “sexual exploitation” of children should be narrowly interpreted to include only offenses involving the manufacturing and marketing/advertising of child pornography.
Section 2251(e) does not provide a definition for “sexual exploitation,” and we give the term its ordinary, everyday meaning. For the purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 2251, “sexual exploitation of children” means to take advantage of children for selfish and sexual purposes. It encompasses all the behaviors identified in § 2251(e)’s provision regarding a single prior conviction enhancement – that is, aggravated sexual abuse, sexual abuse, abusive sexual contact involving a minor or ward, or sex trafficking of children and the production, possession, receipt, mailing, sale, distribution, shipment or transportation of child pornography – and then some. Although the statute sweeps broadly, it is readily understandable.
Indecent Liberties
We conclude that any conviction for the North Carolina crime of taking indecent liberties with children at the very least relates to the sexual exploitation of children. Even assuming the district court committed an error, however, it would not have been a clear or obvious error because the district court’s decision was supported by the literal meaning of the term “sexual exploitation of children” and uncontradicted persuasive authority from other circuits. Here, the case for a severe sentence was overwhelming. Given the egregious nature of his past and continuing offenses against children, even if defendant had been sentenced based on a one-prior offense enhancement, the district court would have likely imposed the same sentence.
Judgment affirmed.
