United States Eleventh Circuit

Defendant's conviction for traveling and engaging in illicit sexual conduct with minors is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not err in denying defendant's motion to suppress defendant's non-Mirandized statements to Cambodian officials because the statements did not fall under the joint venture doctrine; 2) 18 U.S.C. section 2251A applied extraterritorially to reach defendant's conduct; 3) defendant's statement that the minor girls came to his hotel "for the pictures and to have sex together," taken into account with the other evidence presented, allowed the jury to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant engaged in illicit sexual conduct; and 4) the term "purchase," as used in 18 U.S.C. section 2251A(b), covered situations where a defendant pays a minor directly for sex.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/15/2010
• Published 03/15/2010

Judges

• WILSON, Circuit Judge:, Before MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI, Judge:

Court

• United States Eleventh Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Michael Dennis Walsh, Law Offices of Michael Walsh, P.A., Miami, FL, for Frank., Emily M. Smachetti, Anne R. Schultz, Asst. U.S. Atty., Lisa T. Rubio, Miami, FL, Wendy Waldron, Crim Div., Washington, DC, for U.S.