Summary
The Ninth Circuit affirmed Koby Don Williams’s conviction for attempted online enticement of a minor under 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b). The court held that sufficient evidence supported the conviction, rejected his arguments concerning the required conduct and the government’s failure to produce a decoy advertisement, and concluded that the district court properly denied his post-trial motions. The court vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing because the district court failed to make the specific findings required to support an obstruction-of-justice enhancement.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether sufficient evidence supported Williams's conviction for attempted online enticement under 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), including the knowing persuasion, inducement, enticement, or coercion element and the substantial-step requirement.
- Whether § 2422(b) requires proof that the defendant attempted to transform or overcome the will of a minor.
- Whether the government's failure to preserve or produce the final version of a decoy advertisement violated Brady v. Maryland or California v. Trombetta.
- Whether the district court properly applied a two-level obstruction-of-justice enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 without making independent findings that Williams's testimony was false, material, and willful.
Holdings
- The evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Williams knowingly attempted to persuade, induce, entice, or coerce Rebecca to engage in sexual activity and took a substantial step toward completing the offense.
- Section 2422(b) does not require the government to prove that the defendant attempted to transform or overcome the minor's will or that the minor had any particular mental state. The jury need only find that the defendant knowingly attempted to persuade, induce, entice, or coerce the minor to engage in prohibited sexual activity.
- Williams was not entitled to relief on his forfeited claim that the government's failure to preserve or produce the final decoy advertisement violated Brady or Trombetta because he failed to show materiality or that denial of the claim affected his substantial rights.
- The sentence had to be vacated because the district court applied the obstruction-of-justice enhancement without making independent findings that Williams gave false testimony on a material matter with willful intent to obstruct justice.
Key quotations
“The jury therefore only needed to find that Williams knowingly attempted to persuade, induce, entice, or coerce “Rebecca” to engage in sexual acts with him, and not that “Rebecca” had any particular mental state, which Williams transformed or overcame.” (22)
“The government agrees with Williams that the district court committed reversible sentencing error because it did not make explicit findings that his testimony was false, material, and willful.” (26)
“We AFFIRM the conviction, VACATE the sentence, and REMAND for resentencing.” (27)
Factual background
Williams, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement supervisor, exchanged nearly 100 texts with an undercover officer posing as a thirteen-year-old named Rebecca. Despite repeatedly being told that Rebecca was thirteen, Williams negotiated payment and sexual acts, discussed meeting her, traveled to the meeting location, and arrived with cash, vodka, and generic Viagra. He was arrested at the hotel and later testified that he did not believe Rebecca was a minor and had intended to engage only with an adult. The district court imposed an obstruction enhancement based on alleged perjury without making express findings that the testimony was false, material, and willful.
Procedural history
The district court denied Williams's motion concerning authentication and suppression of the decoy advertisement. After a jury found him guilty, the district court denied his motions for acquittal and a new trial. At sentencing, the court adopted the presentence investigation report without change and imposed a 135-month sentence, including a two-level obstruction enhancement based on alleged perjury. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the conviction, vacated the sentence, and remanded for resentencing.
Remand instructions
The conviction is affirmed, but the sentence is vacated. The district court must conduct resentencing and make the independent findings required to support any obstruction-of-justice enhancement based on Williams's testimony.