T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by N i nth C i r c ui tR ul e 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E N IN T H C IR C U IT U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P l ai nt i ff

-A pp el l ee , v. KE NN E T H J . HE ND R YX , D e f

e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t. N o. 09- 30290 D. C . No . C R 0 8 - 2 7 7 - L AB ME MOR AN DU M *

A p p e a l f r o m th e U n ite d S ta te s D is tr ic t C o u rt f orthe D i s tr i c tof

I da ho L a rry A . B urns , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d M a y3, 2010

P ort l a nd, O r e gon B efo re: K L E IN F E L D , B E A , an d IK U T A , C i rcu i tJu d g es.

K enneth H endryx pl ea ded g ui l ty t o o ne coun tof po ss es si on of a vi sual d e p ic tio n in v o lv in g th e u s e o f am in o re n g a g in g in s e x u a llye x p lic it c o n d u c t in



# FI LED MA Y28 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

vi ol at i on of 18 U . S . C . § 2 25 2(a) (4)( B ). T he di stri ctcourtdet erm i ned thatthe t en ye arm andat ory m i ni m um se nt ence appl i ed. 18 U . S . C . § 2 25 2(b)(2). H endryx has a1993 c onvi c t i on f

ors e xua l abus e of

ac hi l d unde rthe a ge of s i xt e e n i n vi ol a t i on of I da ho C ode A nnot a t e d § 18- 1506. T he di s tr i c tc ourts e nt e nc e d H e ndry x t o 120 m on ths’ i m pri sonm ent , the m andat ory m i ni m um . H endryx appeal s hi s s ent ence . 18 U . S . C . § 2 25 2(b)(2) i m po se s am andat ory m i ni m um se nt ence of t en years’ i m p ri so n m en tfo r v i o l at i o n s o f § 2 2 5 2 (a)(4 )(B ) i f th e d efen d an th as a qua l i f y i ng pr i orc onvi c t i on. A m ong thos e a r e pr i orc onvi c t i ons “ unde rthe l a w s of any S t at e r el at i ng t o agg ra vat ed se xu al abuse, se xu al abuse, or abusi ve se xu al c o n d u c t in v o lv in g am in o ro rw a r d .” I d . § 2 2 5 2 ( b ) ( 2 ) . “W e h a v e b r o a d ly in te rp r e te d [ th e id e n tic a l la n g u a g e in 1 8 U .S .C . § 2 2 5 2 A ( b ) ( 1 ) ] to ap p lyn o t s im p ly t o st at e o ffen ses th atare eq u i v al en tt o sex u al ab u se, b u trath er t o ‘ an y st at e o ffen se thatst ands i n som e r el at i on , bear s upo n, or i s a ss oci at ed w i th the generi c off ense . ’ ” U ni t ed S t at es v. S tri ckl and, N o. 08 -300 91 , 20 10 W L 15 29 41 4, at*2 (9th C i r. A pr. 19 , 20 10 ) ( en banc) (quoti ng U ni t ed S t at es v. S i neri us, 50 4 F . 3d 73 7, 74 3 (9th C i r. 20 07 )) .3

U n d e rS in e r iu s , s e x u a l ab u s e f o rp u rp o s e s o f

§ 2 2 5 2 A ( b ) h a s tw o e le m e n ts : ( 1) the abus e e l e m e nt , w he r e “ abus e ” m e a ns “ t o us e ortr e a ts o a s t o i nj ur e , hurt , or d a m a g e [ ;] to c o m m it in d e c e n t a s s au lt o n ,” w h ic h “e n c o m p a s s e s b e h a v io rth a t is h a rm f u l e m o tio n a llya n d p h y s ic a lly ,” a n d ( 2 ) th e s e x u a l e le m e n t, w h e r e “‘s e x u a l’ [ i s gi ve n] i t s or di na ry a nd c om m ons e ns e m e a ni ng. ” S i ne r i us , 504 F . 3d a t740–41 (i nt ernal qu ot at i on m arks om i tt ed).

W e appl y the c a t e gor i c a l appr oa c h of T a y l orv. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 495 U . S . 575 ( 1990) , t o de t e rm i ne i f

I da ho C ode A nnot a t e d § 18- 1506 ( ! 993) i s ac r i m e r e l a t i ng t o sexual abuse of am i no r. T he cr i m e c ov er s s exual cond uctbetw ee n a pers on at le a s t 1 8 y e a r s o lda n d av ic tim u n d e r1 6 y e ar s o ld . I d a h o C o d e A n n . § 1 8 - 1 5 0 6 . T hi s i nc l ude s s t a tut ory r ape of a15- y e a r - ol d bya n 18- y e ar - ol d, w hi c h, w e ha ve he l d, doe s notc ons t i tut e abus e . S e e E s tr a da - E s pi noz av. M uka s e y , 546 F . 3d 1147, 1160 ( 9th C i r . 2008) ( e n ba nc ) ( hol di ng tha ts t a tut oryr ape w i th athr e e - y e a ra ge di ff er ence el em enti s notper s e abu si ve).

W e the r e f

or e appl y the m odi f

i e d c a t e gor i c a l appr oa c h be c aus e the I da ho cr i m e i s broaderthan the generi c c ri m e i n thati tcovers m ore than con du ct

“ r e l a t i ng t o s e xua l abus e . . . i nvol vi ng am i nororw a r d, ” S i ne r i us , 504 F . 3d a t7394

( a l t e r a t i on a nd i nt e rna l quot a t i ons m a rks om i tt e d) , buti ti s notm i s s i ng a n e l e m e nt a l t oge the r , s e e N a va rr o- L ope z v. G onz a l e s , 503 F . 3d 1063, 1073 ( 9th C i r . 2007) (e n b anc) . E stra da-E spi no zado es no tappl y t o thi s c as e bec ause the m andat ory m i ni m um i n 18 U . S . C . § 2252( b) ( 2) doe s notr e qui r e tha tthe pr i orc onvi c t i on conform t o the fe dera l se xu al abuse of am i no r s t atut e, and i nst ea d cov er s abroader r a nge of s t a t e c r i m e s r e l a t i ng t o s e xua l abus e of am i norunde rS i ne r i us a nd S tr ic k la n d . A f

o u r - y e a ra g e d if

f e r e n c e is n o t ar e q u ir e d e le m e n t o f th e g e n e r ic c r i m e tha ttr i gge r s the m a nda t ory m i ni m um of § 2252( b) ( 2) , s o H e ndry x’ s I da ho c onvi c t i on i s notm i s s i ng a n e l e m e ntof the ge ne r i c c r i m e . T he r e f or e , w e a r e not pr e c l ude d f

r om appl y i ng the m odi f i e d c a t e gor i c a l a na l y s i s t o H e ndry x’ s pr i or c onvi c t i on.

U nde rthe m odi f

i e d c a t e gor i c a l appr oa c h, H e ndry x’ s pr i orc onvi c t i on f or sex u al ab u se o f a m i n o r i n v i o l at i o n o f Id ah o C o d e A n n o t at ed § 1 8 -1 5 0 6 i s a c o n v ic tio n r e la tin g to s e x u a l ab u s e o f am in o r . T h e a m e n d e d in f o rm a tio n in H endryx’ s I daho conv i ct i on es t abl i shes thatH endryx w as 41 w hen h e c om m i tt ed the cr i m e and hi s vi ct i m w as 12 . T he di stri ctcourtprop er l y l oo ked t o the am ended i nform at i on t o d et erm i ne thatal tho ug h i ti s possi bl e f or an 18 -y ear- ol d t o v i ol at e § 18- 1506, H e ndry x w a s 41, not18, w he n he vi ol a t e d the s t a tut e . S e e S he pa r d v.5

U ni t e d S t a t e s , 544 U . S . 13, 16 ( 2005) ( hol di ng tha tthe c ha r gi ng doc um e ntm a ybe u sed i n th e m o d i fi ed cat eg o ri cal an al ysi s). T h e am en d ed i n fo rm at i o n al so es t abl i shes thatH endryx’ s c on vi ct i on w as bo th sexual and abu si ve t o a m i no r.

T h e f a c t th a t H e n d ry x e n te r e d a n A lf o r d p le ad o e s n o t c h a n g e th e a n a ly s is . A pl eabase d o n N orth C ar ol i na v. A l ford, 40 0 U . S . 25 (197 0), i s agu i l ty pl ea w h e r e th e d e f

e n d a n t c la im s in n o c e n c e b u t n e v e rth e le s s p le a d s g u ilty , o r d in a r ilyto a voi d r i s k of

aha r s he rs e nt e nc e . S e e S t a t e v. J a kos ki , 79 P . 3d 711, 712 n. 1 ( I da ho 2003) ( “ W he n m a ki ng a n A l f or d pl e a , [ na m e d a f

t e rN orth C a r ol i nav. A l f or d] , the de f e nda ntpl e a ds gui l ty w hi l e a tthe s a m e t i m e a s s e rt i ng tha the ors he i s i nnoc e nt o f th e c h a r g e .” ) . A n A lf

o r d p le ais s u f

f ic ie n t to tr ig g e rs e n te n c in g e n h a n c e m e n ts f ortha tc onvi c t i on. U ni t e d S t a t e s v. G ue rr e r o- V e l a s que z , 434 F . 3d 1193, 1197 ( 9th C i r . 2006) . M or e ove r , s uc h apl e aa dm i t s a l l the f a c tua l a l l e ga t i ons i n the in f o rm a tio n . I d . T he di stri ctcourtw as corr ec tthat , base d o n the m od i fi ed ca t egori ca l anal ys i s of H endryx’ s 199 3 st at e c on vi ct i on , the m andat ory m i ni m um t en ye ar se nt ence appl i es . H endryx’ s other c hal l enges are t o the se nt enci ng gu i del i nes c a l c ul a t i on, i n hi s c a s e . G i ve n tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourtc a l c ul a t e d the gui de l i ne s r a nge6

to b e 1 3 5

– 1 6 8 m o n th s , b u t c h o s e to d e p a rt d o w n w a r d s a n d s e n te n c e H e n d ry x to the m andat ory m i ni m um of 12 0 m on ths, and thatH endryx cannotre ce i ve a l ow er s e nt e nc e tha n w ha the got , w e ne e d notr e a c h the gui de l i ne s c a l c ul a t i on or H en d ry x ’s d u e p ro ce ss claim b as ed o n th e in tro d u ctio n o f th e p rio r v icti m ’s t e s t i m ony i n the s e nt e nc i ng he a r i ng.

AF F I RME D.