# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 6- 15 25

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Dam ie n M or ga n

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Eas te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - St . Lou is

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Sep te m

be r 23 , 20 16 Fil ed : Dec em

be r 1, 2 01 6

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re LOKEN, GRUEND ER, an d B ENTON, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ BENTON, Circu it Ju dg e.

Dam ie n M or ga n pl ed gu il ty to on e co un t o f pr od uc ti on of c hi ld po rn og rap hy in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 22 51 (a) an d on e co un t of a t t em pt ed pr od uc ti on in vi ol at io n o f 18 U.S.C. § 2 25 1( a) an d (e ). He res erv ed th e ri gh t t o a pp eal th e d en ia l of a m ot io n to su pp res s. Mo rg an no w ap pe al s th e m ot io n an d two ba se -o ffen se -le ve len ha nc em en ts to hi s gu id el in es ran ge

. Hav in g juri sd ic ti on un de r 28 U.S.C. § 12 91
,

th is co ur t af

fir m s.

I.

On Aug us t 4, 20 13
, an of fic er di sc ov ered th at a co m pu te r of fere d ch il d

po rn og rap hy by pe er-t o- pe er fil e sh ari ng

. Tha t da y , po li ce id en ti fie d th e co m pu te r’s
IP ad dr es s. Tw e n t y -fo ur da y s la te r, po li ce de te rm in ed th at th e IP ad dr es s was

as si gn ed to Mo rg an

. Ove r se ve n week s la te r, a st at e jud ge is su ed a se arch warra nt fo r hi s ho m e—7 5 da y s aft er th e IP ad d r e s s w a s id en ti fie d an d 51 da y s aft er in ve st ig at or s as so ci at ed th e IP ad dr es s wi th Mo rg an

.

Fi ve d a ys la te r, po li ce ex ecu te d th e warra nt at Mo rg an ’s ho m e. The y al so

arre st ed hi m

on a warra nt for an un rel at ed no -far e-t ran si t v io la ti on

.

The arre st in g of

fic er se iz ed a cel l ph on e fro m Mo rg an an d, whi le ha nd cu ffi ng hi m , no ti ced a ta tt oo on hi s wris t. At th e st at io n, Mo rg an req ue st ed hi s cel l ph on e to
te ll h i s e mp lo y er an d si st er whe re he was

. Po li ce ga ve hi m th e cel l ph on e, un de r
po li ce su pe rv is io n. As M or ga n s cro ll ed th ro ug h hi s con ta ct s, he did no t ob ject as a de te ct iv e watc he d hi s sc reen

. Acco rd in g to th e de te ct iv e , M o rg an sp on ta ne ou sl y sh ared fact s ab ou t th e co nt act s. The de te ct iv e wro te do wn so m e na m es an d nu m be rs

.

W hi le Mo rg an was in cu st od y , a di ffer en t d et ect iv e fo un d o rig in al im ag es of ch il d po rn og rap hy o n a co m pu te r fro m

hi s h om e. One im ag e sh owe d a m an wit h a
ta tt oo ed arm to uc hi ng a fem al e ch il d’s ge ni ta li a. The de te ct iv e who fo un d th e im ag es

as ke d Mo rg an to li ft th e sl eev e of hi s sh i r t s o th at he co ul d ph ot og rap h hi s ta tt oo

. Mo rg an ag reed
, li fti ng hi s sl eev e an d al lo win g ph ot og rap hs w i t ho ut ob jecti on

. Mo rg an ’s tat to os m at ch ed th e ta tt oo s i n t he ph ot og rap hs fro m hi s co m pu te r.

-2

-Po li ce la te r id en ti fie d th e ch il d in th e co m pu te r ima g es

. Mo rg an ’s pu bl ic
Face bo ok pr of

il e le d t o t he pro fil e o f a wo m an who a de te ct iv e reca ll ed was on e of
Mo rg an ’s cel l-p ho ne co nt act s. Her pu bl ic pr of il e sh owe d a da ug ht er res em bl in g th e ch il d p ic tu red

.

The di st ric t co ur t d en ie d Mo rg an ’s m ot io n to su pp res s al l ev id en ce se iz ed 1
fro m hi s ho m e as w e l l a s p hysic al ev id en ce se iz ed fro m hi s pe rs on or po ss es si on

. Fo ll owi ng a co nd it io na l gu il ty pl ea, th e co ur t se nt en ced hi m to 36 0 m on th s, ba se d on

a gu id el in es ran ge in cl ud in g en ha nc em en ts of : (1 ) fo ur l e v el s fo r im ag es de pi ct in g

sa di st ic co nd uc t an d (2 ) fi ve lev el s fo r a p at te rn of a ct iv it y

.

II.

Thi s co ur t rev ie ws a di st ric t co ur t’s fact ua l fin di ng s fo r cl ear erro r an d it s le ga l

co nc lu si on s de no vo

. Unit ed St at es v. Bur st on , 80 6 F.3 d 11 23
, 11 26 (8 th Ci r. 20 15 ). The de ni al of a m ot io n t o su pp res s is affi rm ed un le ss th is co ur t “ fin d[ s] th at th e de ci si on is un su pp or te d by t he ev id en ce, b as ed on an erro ne ou s v ie w of t he law, o r th e Co ur t is le ft wit h a fir m co nv ic ti on th at a m is ta ke ha s be en m ad e.” Unit ed St at es v. Ri le y , 68 4 F .3d 75 8, 7 62 (8t h C ir. 2 01 2) (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d)

.

A.

A se arch warra nt req ui res pr ob ab le cau se , “ a pr act ic al
, co m m on -s en se deci sio n whe th er, gi ve n al l th e ci rcu m st an ces se t fo rth in th e affi da vi t be fo re” th e jud ge , “ th ere is a fai r pr ob ab il it y th at

. . . ev id en ce of a cri m e wil l be fou nd in a pa rti cu la r pl ace.”
Il li no is v. Gat

es , 46 2 U.S. 21 3, 23 8 (1 98 3)

. Thi s co ur t de te rm in es on ly whe th er th e

The Hon or ab le Caro l E. Ja ck so n, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e East ern 1 Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.

-3

-is su in g jud ge “ ha d a su bs ta nt ia l ba si s [to co nc lu de ] th at pr ob ab le cau se ex is te d.” Id

. at 23 8- 39 (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d)

.

Mo rg an arg ue s th at th e in fo rm at io n in th e se arch warra nt was st al e, an d th us th e warra nt la ck ed pr ob ab le cau se , be cau se po li ce di d no t ap pl y fo r th e warra nt un ti l
75 da y s af

te r id en ti fy in g h is IP ad dr es s an d 5 1 d ay s af te r as so ci at in g i t wi th hi m

.

Peri od s m uc h lo ng er th an 75 or 51 da y s ha ve no t ren de red in fo rm at io n st al e in

co m pu te r-b as ed ch il d- po rn og rap hy cas es

. Se e, e.g

. , Unit ed St at es v. Es te y , 59 5 F.3 d
83 6, 84 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (h ol di ng th at a fiv e-m on th de la y di d no t ren de r in fo rm at io n
st al e). The affi da vi t in su pp or t of th e se arch warra nt at te st ed th at co ll ect or s of ch il d

po rn og rap hy te nd to ret ai n im ag es an d th at co m pu te r pr og ram s th at do wnl oa d th es e im ag e s “o f

t e n l eav e[ ] fil es , lo gs or fil e rem na nt s whi ch wou ld te nd to sh ow th e

ex ch an ge , tra ns fer, di st rib ut io n, po ss es si on or or ig in of th e fil es .” Se e Unit ed St at es

v. Ho rn , 18 7 F.3 d 78 1, 78 6 (8 th Ci r. 19 99 ) ( “Th e t i mel in es s of th e in fo rm at io n

su pp li ed in an affi da vi t de pe nd s on th e ci rcu m st an ces of th e cas e, in cl ud in g th e na tu re of th e cri m e un de r in ve s t i g at io n; th e la ps e of ti m e is le as t im po rta nt whe n th e

su sp ect ed cri m in al act iv it y is co nt in ui ng in na tu re an d whe n th e pr op ert y is no t li ke ly

to be de st ro y ed or di ss ip at ed .”). The affi da vi t es ta bl is he d a fai r pr ob ab il it y of fin di ng

ev id en ce o n M or ga n’s co m pu te rs

.

B.

A F o u r t h Am en dm en t se arch oc cu rs “ whe n th e go ve rn m en t vi ol at es a

su bjec ti ve ex pe ct at io n of p r i v acy th at so ci et y reco gn iz es as reas on ab le .” Kyl lo v. Unit ed St at es , 53 3 U.S. 27
, 33 (2 00 1)

. In co nt ras t, wha te ve r “ a pe rs on kn owi ng ly

ex po se s to th e pu bl ic

. . . is no t a su bjec t of Fo ur th Am en dm en t pr ot ect io n.” Ka tz v. Unit ed Sta te s , 38 9 U.S. 3 47 , 35 1 (1 96 7)

.

-4

-Mo rg an ha d no reas on ab le ex pe ct at io n o f p r iv acy whe n he vo lu nt ari ly

di sp l a ye d hi s cel l-p ho ne sc reen in th e pr es en ce of th e de te ct iv es

. Mo rg an ha d hi s ph on e be cau se he as ke d fo r it

. H e d i d no t ob ject whe n th e de te ct iv e ob se rv ed hi s
act iv it ie s. And —ac co rd in g to th e de te ct iv e’s u n c o n te st ed te st im on y —M or ga n
sp on ta ne ou sl y sh ared in fo rm at io n ab ou t hi s co nt act s wit h th e de te ct iv e. Th is is

un li ke of fic ers lo ok in g on th ei r own th ro ug h th e co nt en ts of a cel l ph on e. Se e Ri le y

v. Ca li fo rn ia
, 13 4 S. Ct

. 24 73
, 24 80 -8 2 (2 0 1 4 )

. I n st ead
, it is “ an of fic er’s m ere ob se rv at io n of an it em le ft in pl ai n vi ew,” whi ch “ ge ne ral ly i n v o l v es no Fo ur th
Am en dm en t se arch .” Tex as v. Br ow n , 46 0 U.S. 73 0, 73 8 n.4 (1 98 3)

. Se e Kyl lo
, 53 3 U.S. at 32 (rec og ni zi ng th e Co ur t’s co nt in ue d ho ld in g th at “ vi su al ob se rv at io n is no ‘searc h’ at a ll ”).

Mo rg an be li ev es th at th e pl ai n- vi ew do ct rin e ap pl ie s on ly if: (1 ) th e of fic er is in a la wfu l po si ti on to vi ew th e ev id en ce, (2 ) th e of fic er di sc ov ers th e in cri m in at in g

ev id en ce in ad ve rte nt ly, an d (3 ) t h e i n cri m in at in g na tu re of th e ev id en ce is im m ed ia te ly ap pa ren t. Mo rg an co nt en ds th e la st two co nd it io ns are no t s a t i s fie d. Thi s co nt en ti on co nf

la te s th e pl a i n- vi ew do ct rin e fo r se iz ur es wit h th e pl ai n- vi ew do ct rin e fo r se arch es

. An of fic er do es no t vi ol at e th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t by vi ewin g

ev id en ce fro m a po si ti on he la wfu ll y oc cu pi es , rem em be rin g it
, an d us in g it la te r. Obs erv in g wha t is in pl ai n si gh t do es no t im pl ic at e th e ad di ti on al req ui rem en ts fo r a

se iz ur e; be in g in a la wfu l po si ti on to ob se rv e ev id en ce is su ffi ci en t. Br ow n , 46 0 U.S.

at 73 8 n .4.

Mo rg an ha d no reas on ab le ex pe ct at io n of pr iv acy in hi s cel l-p ho ne sc reen on ce he m ad e it vi si bl e to th e p ub li c b y di sp la y in g i t i n t he pre se nc e o f a d et ect iv e.

C.

A warra nt le ss se arch
, ge ne ral ly un reas on ab le
, is “ va li d if co nd uc te d pu rs ua nt
to th e kn owi ng an d vo lu nt ary co ns en t of th e pe rs on su bjec t to a se arch .” Unit ed

-5

-St

at es v. Sa nd

er s , 42 4 F.3 d 76 8, 77 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ). W he th er co ns en t is vo lu nt ary is a fact ua l qu es ti on , rev ie wed fo r cl ear erro r. Id

. ; Pac e v. Ci ty of Des Mo in es , 20 1
F.3 d 1 05 0, 1 05 3 (8 th Cir . 20 00 ).

The m ag is tra te jud ge fo un d th at a de te ct iv e “ as ke d [Mo rg an ] to m ov e hi s sh irt sl eev e so th at [th e de te ct iv e] co ul d ta ke a ph ot og rap h of [h is ] ta tt oo ed arm

. [Mo rg an ]

ag reed to do so .” To ag ree is “ to in di cat e wil li ng ne ss : co ns en t.” Agr ee , Web st er’s
Thi rd New In tern at io n a l D i c t i o na ry 43 (2 00 2)

. The m ag is tra te jud ge fo un d th at Mo rg an co ns en te d to th e ph ot og rap h s o f h i s t at to o. The di st ric t co ur t ad op te d th at fin di ng an d fo un d “n o e vi de nc e th at [h e] was co erce d.” Not hi ng in di cat es th es e f i nd in gs are cl earl y erro ne ou s. The di st ric t co ur t co rrec tl y de ni ed th e m ot io n t o

su pp res s t he ph ot og rap hs of M or ga n’s t at to os

.

III.

Fi nd in gs of

fact ab ou t s en te nc in g e nh an cem en ts are rev ie wed fo r cl ear erro r; in te rp ret at io ns of th e gu id el in es are rev ie wed de no vo

. Unit ed St at es v. A u l t , 59 8
F.3 d 1 03 9, 1 04 0 (8 th Cir . 20 10 ).

A.

Gui de li ne § 2G2 .1(b )(4 ) au th or iz es a fo ur -le ve l i n c r e a s e to th e ba se of fen se

“ [i]f th e of

fen se in vo lv ed m at eri al th at po rtr ay s

. . . s ad is ti c or m as oc hi st ic co nd uc t

or ot he r de pi ct io ns of vi ol en ce.” The te rm “ sa di st ic ” is no t de fin ed in th e gu id el in es , bu t h as be en ad dr es se d b y th is co ur t s ev eral ti m es

.

If an im ag e de pi ct s act ua l or at te m pt ed pe ne tra ti on , it is pe r se sa di st ic

. Unit ed
St at es v. Bel flo w e r , 3 9 0 F

. 3 d 56 0, 56 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 04 ). An im ag e ne ed no t sh ow
act ua l or at te m

pt ed pe ne tra ti on to po rtr ay sa di st ic m at e r i a l

. Se e Unit ed St at es v.

-6

-Pa r k e r , 26 7 F.3 d 83 9, 84 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 01 ). Co nd uc t th at is “ su ffi ci en tl y pa in fu l
,

co erci ve , abu si ve , and de gr ad in g” m ay als o b e sa di st ic

. Id

.

The im ag es at is su e sh ow Mo rg an ’s fin ge rs pl aced on th e in si de of th e ch il d’s la bi a, sp read in g th em to ex po se he r ge ni ta li a. At se nt en ci ng , th e di st ric t co ur t fo un d th at th es e im ag es de pi ct ed “ a fo rm of pe ne tra ti on ” be cau se “ [t]hi s was no t a si tu at io n whe re th e Defen da nt was to uc hi ng he r ex te rn al ly.” Thi s fact ua l de te rm in at io n is no t cl earl y erro ne ou s. Th e d is tri ct pro pe rly app li ed th e fo ur -le ve l en ha nc em en t.

B.

Gui de li ne § 4B 1.5 (b ) au th or iz es a fiv e-l ev el en ha nc em en t if (1 ) “ th e de f e n d a n t ’s in st an t of

fen se of co nv ic ti on is a co ve red se x cri m e” an d, as rel ev an t he re, (2 ) “ th e de fen da nt en ga ge d in a pa tt ern of act iv it y in vo lv in g pr oh ib it ed se xu al

co nd uc t.”

Mo rg an ob

jects to t h is en ha nc em en t, cl ai m in g hi s at te mpt ed pr od uc ti on of ch il d po rn og rap hy is no t “ pr oh ib it ed s e x ua l co nd uc t,” th us pr ecl ud in g a pa tt ern of

act iv it y

. He reac he s t hi s v ie w by co m pa rin g t he de fin it io ns of “ co ve red se x crim e”

an d “ pr oh ib it ed se xu al co nd uc t.” Acco rd in g to Mo rg an , “ pr oh ib it ed se xu al co nd uc t” in cl ud es pr od uc ti on of ch il d po rn og rap hy bu t no t at te m pt ed pr od uc ti on , whi ch th us

can no t b e a s eco nd off

en se req ui red for a pa tt ern of a ct iv it y

.

App li cat io n No te 2 d efi ne s “ co ve red sex cri m e” as :

(A) an of fen se , pe rp et rat ed ag ai ns t a m in or , un de r (i) ch a p t e r 10 9A of ti tl e 18
, Uni te d St at es Co de ; (ii ) ch ap te r 11 0 of su ch ti tl e, no t in cl ud in g tra ffi ck in g in
, rece ip t of
, or po ss es si on of

, ch il d po rn og rap hy, or a
reco rd ke ep in g of

fen s e; (ii i) ch ap te r 11 7 of su ch ti tl e, no t in cl ud in g tra ns m it ti ng in fo rm at io n ab ou t a m in or or fi l i n g a fact ua l st at em en t ab ou t an ali en in di vi du al ; o r (i v) 18 U.S.C. § 1 59 1; or

-7

-(B) an at te m pt or a co ns pi racy to co m m it an y of

fen s e de sc rib ed in

su bd iv is io ns (A)(i ) th ro ug h (i v) of t hi s n ot e.

App li cat io n No te 4(A) de fin es “ pr oh ib it ed sex ua l co nd uc t” as:

( i ) a n y of fen se de sc rib ed in 18 U.S.C. § 24 26 (b )(1 )(A) or (B); (ii ) t h e pr od uc ti on of ch il d po rn og rap hy; or (ii i ) tra ffi ck in g in ch il d po rn og rap hy on ly if, pr io r to th e co m m is si o n o f t he in st an t of

fen se of

co nv ic ti on , th e de fen da nt su st ai ne d a fel on y co nv ic ti on fo r th at tra ffi ck in g in ch il d po rn og rap hy. It do es no t in cl ud e rece ip t or po ss es si on of c hi ld po rn og rap hy.

Mo rg an arg ue s th at su bs ect io n (B) of Not e 2, by ex pl ic it ly in cl ud in g at te m pt ,
m ean s th at th e st at ut es in su bs ect io n (A) do no t in cl ud e at te m pt ed pr od uc ti on of ch il d

po r n o g r a p h y

. By hi s lo gi c, be cau se “ pr oh ib it ed se xu al co nd uc t” do es no t m en ti on “at t e mp te d” pr od uc ti on , at te m pt is no t in cl ud ed in pr oh ib it ed se xu al co nd uc t. Mo rg an arg ue s th at , a t l e as t, th e de fin it io ns are am bi gu ou s whe th er at te m

pt ed

pr od uc ti on of ch il d po rn og rap hy i s pr oh ib it ed se xu al co nd uc t. He in vo ke s t he ru le of len it y to vo id th e en ha nc em en t.

The ru le of le ni ty wil l “ res ol ve am bi gu it y in fav or of th e de fen da nt on ly at th e

en d of th e pr oc es s of co ns tru in g wha t Co ng res s ha s ex pr es se d whe n th e or di na ry

can on s of st at ut or y co ns tru ct io n ha ve rev ea l ed no sa ti sf act or y co ns tru ct io n.”
Loc kh ar t v. Unit

ed St at es , 13 6 S. Ct

. 95 8, 96 8 (2 01 6) (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s

om it te d)

. An arg ua bl e al te rn at iv e co ns tru ct io n “ can no t au to m at ic al ly tri gg er th e ru le of len it y .” Id

.

Here, t he re i s a s at is fact or y co ns tru ct io n: Bot h d efi ni ti on s— ex pl ic it ly in t he f i r s t d e f

i n i t i o n a n d i n t h e s e c o n d b y r e f e r e n c i n g 1 8 U

. S

. C

. § 24 26 (b )(1 ) ( A )

— i n co rp or at e ch ap te r 11 0 of ti tl e 18
, whi ch in cl ud es at te m pt ed

-8

-pr od uc ti on of ch il d po rn og rap hy. Thi s pl ai n read in g of th e te xt is th e m or e na tu ral

in te rp r e t a t i o n

. Se e Unit

ed St at es v. Br ox m eyer , 6 99 F.3 d 26 5, 28 5 (2 d Ci r. 20 12 ).
No am bi gu it y t r i gg ers th e ru le of le ni ty. The di st ric t co ur t co rrec tl y ru le d th at

“ at te m pt ed pr od uc ti on of ch il d po rn og rap hy is a cri m e un de r ch ap te r 11 0 of ti tl e 18 ,”

an d t hu s p ro pe rly app li ed th e fi ve -le ve l en ha nc em en t.

* * * * * * *

The jud gm en t i s af

fir m ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-9

-