# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 2- 10 06

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

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 la nt

v.

Daro n Lee Ju ng ers

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

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 2- 11 00

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

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 la nt

v.

Ro na ld Bo ne st ro o

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

an t - Ap pe ll ee

__ __ __ __ __ __
App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of S ou th Dako ta - Sio ux Fal ls__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Octo be r 18 , 20 12
Fil ed : J an ua ry

7, 2 01 3

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re RI LEY, Chi ef J ud ge , COLLOTO N and GRUENDER, Circu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __
RILEY, Chi ef J ud ge

.

Sep ar a t e ju rie s co nv ic te d Daro n Lee Ju ng ers an d Ro na ld Bo ne st ro o (co ll ect iv el y , de fen da nt s) of at te m pt ed se x tra ffi ck in g of a m in or , in vi ol at io n of th e

Traffi ck in g Vict im Pro te ct io n Act of 20 00 (TVPA). The di st ric t co ur t in each cas e 1

gr an te d each de fen da nt ’s m ot io n fo r jud gm en t of acq ui tt al un de r Fed

. R. Cri m

. P. 29

. The go ve rn m en t ap pe al s. Hav in g juri sd ic ti on un de r 1 8 U.S.C. § 37 31 , we rev ers e.

See Un it ed Sta te s v . Boe se n, 4 91 F.3d 85 2, 8 55 (8t h C ir. 2 00 7)

.

I. BACKGRO UND

In Feb ru ary 20 11

, st at e an d fed eral la w e nf or cem en t of

fic ers wor ki ng

un de rco ve r in Si ou x Fal ls

, So ut h Dak ot a, pl aced se ve ral on li ne ad ve rti se m en ts in an

effo rt to ap pr eh en d in di vi du al s se ek in g to ob ta in ch il dr en fo r se x. Offi cers pr et en de d

to be a m an off

eri ng hi s g irl fri en d’s u nd erag e d au gh te rs fo r se x whi le hi s gi rlf rie nd

was ou t o f to wn.

Ju ng ers an d Bo ne st ro o each r e s p o n de d to th e ad ve rti se m en ts

. Afte r se ve ral

e-m ai ls di sc us si ng de ta il s ab ou t t he gi rls , t he ir ag es , a nd th e rat es fo r se x, an d a fte r

rece iv in g an ag e-re gr es se d ph ot og rap h of ad ul t fem al e of fic ers , Ju ng ers in di cat ed he

wan te d an el ev en -y ear ol d gi rl fo r an ho ur so sh e co ul d pe rfo rm or al se x on hi m

.

18 U.S.C. §§ 15 91 an d 15 94 (a). See Pu b. L. No. 10 6– 38 6, Div. A, 11 4 Stat

. 1

14 64 (20 00 ).

-2

-Ju ng ers th en t r a v e l e d fro m Si ou x Ci ty, Io wa, to th e ho us e in Si ou x Fal ls th at la w

en fo rcem en t of

fic ers were us in g fo r th e un de rco ve r op erat io n. Ju ng ers co nf irmed he

wou ld pa y to rece iv e or al se x fr o m t h e e l e ve n- y ear- ol d gi rl, bu t in di cat ed he was

un co m fo rta bl e do in g so at th e h o u s e an d wou ld pr efer to ta ke th e gi rl wit h hi m

in st ead . Pol ic e arr es te d J un ge rs when he en te red th e h ou se

.

Bo ne st ro o a ls o a gr eed to m eet an un de rco ve r ag en t at th e h ou se aft er s ev eral

e-m ai ls an d reco rd ed te le ph on e co nv ers at io ns ab o u t th e gi rls an d th e rat es fo r se x
wit h th em

. Afte r rece iv in g an ag e-re g res se d ph ot og rap h, Bo ne st ro o ag reed to pa y $2 00 to ha ve se x wit h th e fo ur te en -y ear- ol d twi n gi rls fo r an ho ur

. W he n Bo ne st ro o

arri ve d at th e ho us e, he as ke d if th e twi ns were th ere an d s h owe d th e un de rco ve r

of fic er the m oney he br ou gh t to co m pl et e th e tra ns act io n. Offi cers arre st ed Bo ne st ro o
sh or tl y th erea fte r.

Ju ng ers an d Bo ne st ro o were each ch arg ed wit h at t e mp t e d co m m erci al se x

tra ffi ck in g, in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. §§ 15 91 an d 15 94 (a). At th ei r res pe ct iv e tri al s,

ne it he r Ju ng ers no r Bo ne st ro o pr es en te d an y ev id en ce in de fen se

. Rat he r th an
ch al le ng e th e fact s, bo th arg ue d th ey were m erel y co ns um ers or pu rch as ers of

co m m erci al se x act s, no t “ se x tra ffi ck ers ” of ch il dr en

. The de fen da nt s e a c h t i mel y

m ov ed fo r jud gm en t of acq ui tt al pu rs ua nt to Fed

. R. Cri m

. P. 29 (a) on th at ba si s. The

di st ric t co ur t in each cas e to ok t h e mo t io ns un de r ad vi se m en t. Ju ng ers ’s an d

Bo ne st ro o’s re sp ect iv e juri es fou nd th em gu il ty.

On Decem

be r 5, 20 11

, th e di st ric t co ur t in Ju ng ers ’s cas e acq ui tt ed Ju ng ers an d

di sc ha rg ed hi m fro m co nf in em en t, fin di ng th e “ ev id en ce pr es en te d at tri al [was ]

le ga ll y in su ffi ci en t to su pp or t a co nv ic t i on fo r se x tra ffi ck in g un de r § 15 91 .” The

di st ric t co ur t reas on ed “ th e pu rp os e of § 15 9 1 is to pu ni sh se x tra ffi ck ers an d th at

Co ng res s di d no t in te nd to ex pa nd th e fie ld of th os e pr os ecu te d un de r th at st at ut e to

th os e who pu rch as e se x m ad e av ai la bl e b y tra ffi ck ers .”

-3

-O n J a n u a r y 4 , 2 01 2, th e di st ric t co ur t in Bo ne st ro o’s cas e li ke wis e acq ui tt ed

Bo ne st ro o of hi s co nv ic ti on un de r §§ 15 91 an d 15 94 (a) be cau se of in su ffi ci en t

ev i d e nc e an d di sc ha rg ed hi m fro m co nf in em en t. The di st ric t co ur t co nc lu de d

“ [a]lt ho ug h a ba re read in g o f at lea st on e o f th es e th ree v erb s [r ecru it s, en ti ces , and

ob ta in s] m ay su pp or t a de te rm in at io n th at § 15 91 was m ean t to en co m pa ss pu rch as ers

of se x act s fro m m in or s, th e en ti re la ng ua ge an d de si gn of t h e s t a t u te as a who le

in di cat es th at it is m ean t to pu ni sh th os e who are th e pr ov id ers or pi m ps of ch il dr en ,

no t th e pu r c h a s e r s or th e joh ns .” The go ve rn m en t ap pe al s bo th or de rs , arg ui ng

“ [t]he re i s n o ‘cu st om er ex cep ti on ’ to 18 U.S.C. § 1 59 1.”

II

. DISCUSS IO N

A. Sta nda rd o f Rev ie w
A d is tri ct co ur t “ m

us t en te r a jud gm en t of acq ui tt al o f a n y o f f en se fo r whi ch

th e ev id en ce i s i ns uf

fic ie nt to su st ai n a co nv ic ti on .” Fed . R. Cri m . P. 29 (a).

I n rev ie win g a di st ric t co ur t’s gr an t of a m ot io n fo r a jud g men t o f

acq ui tt al

, th is co ur t rev ie ws th e su ffi ci en cy o f th e ev id en ce de no vo , vi ewin g ev id en ce in th e li gh t m os t fav or ab l e t o th e go ve rn m en t,

res ol vi ng co nf

li ct s in th e go ve rn m en t’s fav or , a n d acce pt in g al l

reas on ab le in fere nc es th at su pp or t t h e v e rd ic t. The st an da rd of rev ie w is ve ry st ric t, an d we wil l rev ers e a co nv ic ti on on ly if we co nc lu de th at

no reas on ab le jury co ul d h a v e fo un d th e accu se d gu il ty be y on d a

reas on ab le do ub t.

Uni te d St at es v. W ard , 6 86 F.3d 87 9, 88 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v.

Jo hn so n, 6 39 F.3d 43 3, 4 37 -3 8 (8 th Cir . 20 11 )) (q uo ta ti on m ark s o m it te d)

. “ W he n

a su ffi ci en cy arg um en t hi ng es on th e in te rp ret at io n of a st at ut e, we rev ie w th e di st ric t

co ur t’s s ta tu to ry

in te rp ret at io n de no vo .” Uni te d Stat es v. Reed

, 66 8 F .3d 97 8, 9 82
(8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Gen try, 55 5 F.3 d 65 9, 66 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ))
(in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d)

.

-4

-B. Pla in Mea ni ng of 1 8 U.S.C. § 15 91

Sect io n 15 91 pr oh ib it s kn owi ng ly recr ui ti ng , en ti ci ng , ha rb or ing

, tr an sport in g,

p ro vi di ng , o bt ai ni ng or m ai nt ai ni ng “ a m in or , k no win g th e m in or wou ld be c a u s e d

to en ga ge in co m

m erci al se x acts .” Uni te d Stat es v. Elb ert

, 56 1 F.3 d 77 1, 77 7 (8 th 2

Ci r. 20 09 ). Sect io n 15 94 (a) m ak es an at te m pt ed vi ol at io n of § 15 91 a fed eral cri m e.

Si nc e Co ng res s en act ed § 15 91 on Octo be r 28

, 20 00

, as pa rt of th e TVPA, th e

li on ’s sh are of pr os ecu ti on s un de r § 15 91 ha ve in vo lv ed of fen de rs who ha ve pl ay ed

so m e pa rt in su pp lying co m m erci al se x act s. See, e.g ., Uni te d St at es v. Ch ap pe ll

, 66 5

F.3 d 10 12

, 10 14 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ); Uni te d Stat es v. Pal m er, 64 3 F.3 d 10 60

, 10 63 (8 th

Ci r. 20 11 ). In Uni t e d S t a t e s v. Co ok e, 67 5 F.3 d 11 53

, 11 55 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ), we

affi rm ed th e co nv ic ti on of an at te m pt ed pu rch as er un de r § 15 91

, bu t di d no t co ns id er

th e is su e rai se d i n t hi s ap pe al . Accor d Un it ed Sta te s v . Stre ve ll , 18 5 F . App ’x 84 1,

84 4- 46 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 06 ) (u np ub li sh ed pe r cu ria m ) (aff irming co nv ic ti on of at te m pt ed

pu rch as er o f se x fr om

a m in or in vi ol at io n o f §§ 15 91 an d 1 59 4)

.

The di st ric t co ur t an d th e pa rti es in th es e co ns ol id at ed ap pe al s ag ree § 15 91 is

un am bi gu ou s. The so le is su e rai se d on ap pe al is whe th er “[t ]h e p l ai n an d

un am bi gu ou s pr ov is io ns of 18 U.S.C. § 15 91 ap pl y to bo th su pp li ers an d co ns um ers

of co m m erci al sex act s.” W e co nc lu de th ey do

.

“ Our st art in g po in t in in te rp ret in g a st at ut e is al way s th e la ng ua ge of th e st at ut e

it se lf.” Uni te d S ta te s v . S.A., 12 9 F.3 d 99 5, 99 8 (8 th Cir . 19 97 ). “ [I]f th e in te nt of

Co ng res s can be c l earl y di sc ern ed fro m th e st at ut e’s la ng ua ge , th e jud ic ia l in qu iry

m us t en d.” Uni te d St at es v. Beh ren s, 64 4 F.3 d 75 4, 75 5 ( 8 t h C i r

. 2 01 1) (q uo ti ng
Uni te d St at es v. McAl li st er, 22 5 F.3 d 98 2, 98 6 (8 th Ci r. 2 0 0 0 )) (in te rn al m ark s

om it te d)

.

“ The te rm ‘com

m erci al se x act ’ m ean s a n y se x act

, on acco un t of whi ch 2

an y th in g o f va lu e is gi ve n t o o r rec ei ve d b y an y pe rs on .” 18 U.S.C. § 1 59 1( e)(3 ).

-5

-W he re st at ut or y la ng ua ge is pl ai n, “ th e so le fu nc ti on of th e co ur ts —at

le as t whe re th e di sp os it io n req ui red by th e te xt is no t ab su rd —i s to

en fo rce it acco rd in g to it s te rm s.” [Lam ie v. U.S. Tr., 54 0 U.S. 52 6, 53 4 (2 00 4) ]. Thu s, if th e rel ev an t te xt is no t reas on ab ly su sc ep ti bl e to m or e th an on e in te rp ret at io n[

, i.e. am bi gu ou s], we wil l n o t l o o k be y on d it

un le ss ap p l i cat io n of th e pl ai n la ng ua ge “ wil l pr od uc e a res ul t de m on st rab ly at od ds wit h th e in te nt io ns of it s dr aft ers .” Uni te d St at es v. Ro n P ai r Ent ers ., 48 9 U.S. 2 35 , 24 2 (1 98 9)

.

Co nt em p. In du s. Co rp . v. Fro st , 5 64 F.3 d 98 1, 98 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ); se e al so Uni te d

S t a t e s v. Jo ng ewaar d, 56 7 F.3 d 33 6, 33 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ) (“ Our in qu iry th ere f o r e
be gi ns an d e nd s wi th th e u na m bi gu ou s t ex t o f th e st at ut e.”).

“ In in te rp ret in g th e st at ut e at is su e, ‘[w] e co ns id er no t on ly th e ba re m ean in g’

of th e cri ti cal wor d or ph ras e ‘bu t a l so it s pl acement an d pu rp os e in th e st at ut or y

sc he m e.’” Hol lo way v. Uni te d St at es , 52 6 U.S. 1, 6 (1 99 9) (q uo ti ng Bai le y v. Uni te d

St at es , 51 6 U.S. 13 7, 14 5 (1 99 5) ). “ [I]n ex po un di ng a st at ut e, we m us t no t be gu id ed
by a si ng le se nt en ce or m em be r of a se nt en ce, bu t lo ok to th e pr ov is io ns of th e who le

la w , an d to it s ob

ject an d po li cy .” U.S. Nat’l Ban k of Or. v. In de p. In s. Age nt s of

Am

., In c., 50 8 U.S. 43 9, 45 5 (1 99 3) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Heir s of Bo is do ré, 49
U.S. (8 Ho w.) 11 3, 1 22 (18 50 )) (i nt ern al qu ot at io n m ark s o m it te d)

.

Und er th e he ad in g “ Sex tra ffi ck in g of ch il dr en or by fo rce, frau d, or co erci on ,”
§ 1 59 1( a) p ro vi de s

W ho ev er k no win gl y

—

(1 ) in or affe ct in g in te rs ta te or fo re i g n c o mm erce , or wit hi n th e
sp eci al m ari ti m e an d t erri to ria l ju ris di ct io n o f th e Uni te d Stat es ,
recr ui ts

, en ti ces , ha rb or s, tra ns po rts

, pr ov i d es , ob ta in s, or

m ai nt ai ns by any

m ean s a p ers on ; o r

-6

-(2 ) be ne fit s, fin an ci al ly or by rece iv in g an y th in g of va lu e, fro m
pa rti ci pa ti on in a ve nt ur e whi ch ha s eng ag ed in an act de sc rib ed
in vi ol at io n o f pa rag rap h (1 ),

kn owi ng , or in reck le ss di sr eg ard of th e fact

, th at m ean s of fo rce, th reat s of fo rce, frau d, co erci on de sc rib ed in su bs ect io n (e)( 2 )

, o r a ny

co m bi na ti on of su ch m ean s wi ll be us ed to cau se th e pe rs on to en ga ge in a co m m erci al se x act

, or th at th e pe rs on ha s no t at ta in ed th e ag e of 18

y ears an d wil l be cau se d to en ga ge in a co m m erci al se x act

, sh al l be

pu ni sh ed as p ro vi de d i n s ub se ct io n (b ).

Not hi ng in th e te xt of § 15 91 ex pr es s l y l i mi t s it s pr ov is io ns to su pp li ers or

su gg es ts Co ng res s in te nd ed cat eg or ic al ly to ex cl ud e pu rch as ers or co ns um ers (joh ns )

of co m m erci al se x act s who se co nd uc t ot he rwis e vi ol at es § 15 91

. To t h e c o n tra ry , th e ex pa ns iv e la ng ua ge of § 15 91 “ cri m in al iz es a br oa d sp ect ru m ” of co nd uc t rel at in g

to th e se x tra f

f i c k i n g o f ch il dr en

. Jo ng ewaar d, 56 7 F.3 d at 34 0 (rejec ti ng th e

as se rti on th at 18 U.S.C. § 87 5( c) on ly pr oh ib it ed a su bc at eg or y of cri m in al co nd uc t

as co nt rary to t he st at ut or y tex t).

By it s te rm s, § 15 91 (a)( 1) ap pl ie s t o “[w ]h o e ve r kn owi ng ly

. . . recr ui ts

,

en ti ces , ha rb or s, tra ns po rts

, pr ov id es , ob ta in s, or m ai nt ai ns [a ch il d] by an y m ean s.”

“ The se wor ds do no t le nd th em se lv es to res tri ct iv e in te rp ret at io n.” Uni te d St at es v.

Cu lb ert

, 43 5 U.S. 37 1, 37 3 (1 97 8) (in te rp ret in g th e Hob bs Act, 18 U.S .C. § 19 51 ).

The te rm s “ who ev er” an d “ an y ” are ex pa ns iv e. See, e.g ., Free m an v. Qui ck en Loa ns , In c., 56 6 U.S.

__

_,

__ _, 13 2 S. Ct

. 20 34

, 20 42 (2 01 2) (ex pl ai ni ng th e te rm “ an y ” “ ha s

an ‘exp an si ve m ean in g,’” th at “ can br oa de n to th e m ax im um , bu t ne ve r ch an ge in th e
le as t, th e cl ear m ean in g of th e ph ras e se le ct ed by Co ng res s” ) (q uo ti ng Dep ’t of Hou s.

& Urb an Dev

. v. Ru ck er, 53 5 U.S. 12 5, 13 1 (2 00 2) ); Uni te d St at es v. Gon zal es , 52 0

U.S. 1, 5 (1 99 7) (“ Rea d na tu ral ly, th e wor d ‘any ’ ha s an ex pa ns iv e m ean in g, th at is

, ‘one or so m e in di sc riminat el y of wha te v e r ki nd .’ ”) (q uo ti ng W eb st er’s Thi rd New

In te rn at io na l Dict io na ry 97 (1 97 6) ); Uni te d St at es v. Luc ie n, 34 7 F.3 d 45

, 51 (2 d Ci r.

20 03 ) (rejec ti ng a de fen da nt ’s pr op os ed co ns tru ct io n of a st at ut e t ha t li m it ed

-7

-pu ni sh m en t fo r he al th care frau d to he al th care p r o fes si on al s be cau se th e st at ut e

ap pl ie d to “ who ev er” co m m it te d su ch frau d an d th e co m m on m ean in g of “ who ev er”

was “ wha te ve r pe rs on , an y pe rs on at al l, n o m at te r who ”) (qu ot in g W eb st er’s T hi rd

New In te rn at io na l Dict io na ry 26 11 (1 98 1) ) (in te rn al q u o ta ti on m ark s om it te d) ;

Un i t e d St at es v. Kha ti b, 70 6 F.2 d 21 3, 21 8 (7 th Ci r. 19 83 ) (rejec ti ng a de fen da nt ’s

pr op os ed st at us li m it at io n o n t he te rm “ who ev er” in 7 U.S.C. § 20 24 (b )(1 ) be cau se

th e st at ut or y la ng ua ge was no t res tri ct iv e). Neit he r te rm im pl ic it ly li m it s th e

ap pl ic at io n of § 15 91 (a)( 1) to su pp li ers no r ex em pt s pu rch as ers fro m pr os ecu ti on

un de r th e st at ut e. 3

The de ta il ed li st of pr os cri be d act iv it ie s in § 15 91 (a)( 1 ) li ke wis e do es no t

co nt ai n an y res tri ct iv e or li m it in g l a n g u a g e , be y on d req ui rin g th e act s fal l wit hi n

Co ng res s’s po wer to reg ul at e co m m erce

. Sect io n 15 91 (a)( 1) m ak es no di st in ct io n
be twee n s up pl ie rs or pu rch as ers of co m m erci al se x act s wit h c hi ld ren —i t p ro hi bi ts

act s o f tr affi ck in g re ga rd le ss of t he id en ti ty or st at us of t he tra ffi ck er.

Des pi te th e ab se nc e of res tri ct iv e la ng ua g e , th e de fen da nt s rep eat ed ly as se rt
§ 15 91 (a)( 1) is ai m ed ex cl us iv el y at or ga ni zed se x- tra ffi ck in g rin gs or ve nt ur es th at

pr of it fro m th e il li ci t se x tra de

. W hi le § 15 91 un do ub te dl y ta rg et s su ch or ga ni zat io ns , th e la ng ua ge in § 15 91 in di cat es Co ng res s al so ta rg et ed in di vi du al act s of tra ffi ck in g.

To vi ol at e § 15 91 (a)( 2)

, a tra ffi ck er m us t be ne fit “ fin an ci al ly or by receiv in g an y th in g

of va lu e fro m pa rti ci pa ti on ” in a tra ffi ck in g “ ve nt ur e”— de fin ed as “ an y gr ou p of two

or m or e in di vi du al s as so ci at ed in fact ,” § 15 91 (e)( 5)

. Sect io n 15 91 (a)( 1) is no t

su bjec t t o t ho se same lim it at io ns

.

Ju ng ers ’s br ie f ack no wled ge s, “ Neit he r Ju ng ers no r th e di st ric t co ur t ha s ev er 3

co nt en de d th at th e te rm ‘w ho ev er’ in [§ 15 91 (a)], s t a n d in g on it s own , wou ld no t in cl ud e in di vi du al s s uc h a s J un ge rs .”

-8

-The de fen da nt s m ai n t a in th is ap pe al tu rn s on th e m ean in g of th e te rm

“ ob ta in s.” Sect io n 15 91 do es no t de fin e th e te rm “ ob ta in s” or an y of th e ot he r ve rb s

li st ed

. “ W he n a wor d is no t de fin ed by st at ut e, we no rm al ly co ns tru e it in acco rd wit h

it s or di na ry or na tu ral m ean in g.” Sm it h v. Uni te d St at es , 50 8 U.S. 22 3, 22 8 (1 99 3)

. The de fen da nt s ack n owl ed ge “ ob ta in s,” by it se lf, is “ an in cred ib ly br oa d” ve rb

, de vo id o f a n y in he ren t li m it at io n on th e act or or hi s ob ject. See Uni te d St at es v.

Ram os -Aren as , 59 6 F.3 d 78 3

, 7 8 7 (1 0t h Ci r. 20 10 ) (d efi ni ng ob ta in s to in cl ud e

“ at ta in in g or acq ui rin g a th in g of va lu e in an y way ,” wit ho ut li m it in g who ul ti m at el y

rece iv es it ) (q uo ti ng Bl ack ’s Law Dict io na ry 10 78 (6 th ed

. 19 90 ) (“ To ge t ho ld of by

effo rt; to ge t po ss es si on of ; to pr oc ur e; to acq ui re, in an y way .”). Ano th er di ct io na ry
de fin es ob ta in to m ean “ [t]o co m e in to th e po ss es si on of ; to pr oc ur e; to ge t, acq ui re,

o r s e c u r e

. ” O x f

o r d E n g l i s h D i c t i o n a r y O n l i n e ( S e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 2 )

ht tp :/ /o e d

. c o m

/v ie w/En try/1 30 00 2 (No ve m be r 2, 20 12 ). The or di na ry an d na tu ral

m ean in g of “ ob ta in s” an d th e ot he r te rm s Co ng res s s e l e ct ed in dr aft in g § 15 91 are
br oa d en ou gh to en co m pa ss th e act io ns of bo th su pp li er s an d pu rch as ers of

co m m erci al sex act s.

Tho ug h ul ti m at el y reac hi ng a di ffer en t co n c lu si on , th e di st ric t co ur t in

Bo ne st ro o’s cas e ack no wled ge d “ a ba re read i n g of at le as t on e of th es e th ree ve rb s [rec ru it s, en ti ces , an d ob ta in s] m ay su pp or t a de te rm in at io n th at § 15 91 was m ean t to

en co m pa ss pu rch as ers of se x act s f r o m mi n o r s .” It is far fro m ab su rd to co nc lu de

Co ng res s in te nd ed § 15 91 (a) to ap pl y to pu rch as ers th at vi ol at e it s p ro vi si on s. See

Lam ie , 54 0 U.S. at 53 4.

The de fen da nt s a c k n o w l ed ge th e br ead th of th e st at ut or y la ng ua ge an d th e
ab se nc e of an y ex pl ic it li m it at io n to su p p l i e r s , b ut arg ue ap pl y in g § 15 91 to

pu rch as ers is in co ns is te nt wit h th e pu rp os e, pl acement, st ru ct ur e, an d co nt ex t of th e

s t a t u t e as a who le an d ren de rs pa rts of th e TVPA su pe rfl uo us or m ean in gl es s

. Sp eci fic al ly, th e de fen da nt s as se rt th e la ng ua ge of § 15 91

, read in co nt ex t, in di cat es

Co ng res s in te nd ed to pr oh ib it t he po te nt ia l “ ch ro no lo gi cal ” st ep s a ch il d se x-

-9

-tra ffi ck in g or ga ni zat io n m us t ta ke to ga in co nt ro l ov er ch il d vi ct im s an d pr ep are th em

to en ga ge in co m

m erci al se x act s in th e fu tu re, bu t st op pe d sh or t of cri m in al iz in g th e

co nd uc t of th e pu rch as ers of su ch act s. Acco rd in g to th e de fen da nt s, th e de fin it io ns

of “ se x t raff

ic ki ng ” an d t he ph ras e “ wil l b e cau se d” in di cat e § 15 91 on ly app li es to

“ pr ed ic at e co nd uc t” co m

m it te d b y su pp li ers of c om m erci al sex act s.

Not wit hs ta nd in g th e de fen da nts ’ ar gum en t to the co ntr ar y , the T V PA de fin it io n

of “ se x tra ffi ck in g” —b ro ad ly de fin ed as “ th e recr ui tm en t, ha rb or in g, tra ns po rta ti on ,
pr ov is io n, or ob ta in in g of a pe rs on fo r th e pu rp os e of a co mmerc ia l se x ac t ”—r ead il y

in cl ud es th e act io ns of a pu rch as er who se so le pu rp os e is ob ta in in g a ch il d f o r se x.

22 U.S.C. § 71 02 (9 ) (em ph as is ad d e d )

. “‘Traffic ,’ li ke ‘trad e,’ in cl ud es bo th ‘the

bu si ne ss of bu y in g an d se ll in g fo r m on ey ’ an d ‘the b u s in es s of ex ch an gi ng

co m m od it ie s b y ba rte r.’” Uni te d St at es v. Hor n, 1 87 F.3d 78 1, 7 91 (8t h C ir. 1 99 9)
(q uo ti ng May v . S lo an , 1 01 U.S. 2 31 , 2 37 (1 87 9) , a nd ci ti n g We b s te r’s Thi rd New

In te rn at io na l Dict io na ry at 24 22 (1 98 6) (“ tra ffi c” is “ th e a c t i v i t y of ex ch an gi ng

co m m od it ie s b y

ba rte rin g o r bu y in g a nd sel li ng ”)).

The de fen da nt s’ in te rp ret at io n of “ tra ffi ck in g,” as res tri ct ed to su pp ly on ly, is

to o na rro w. Bo ne st ro o as se rts “ [t]he pl ai n mea n i n g o f th e wor d ‘traffi ck in g’ in a

co m m erci al se qu en ce do es no t i nc lu de th e en d u se r.” In su pp or t, Bon es tro o clai m s

“a d r u g us er is no t ev er de sc rib ed as a ‘traffi ck er.’” To th e co nt rary, in cl ari fy in g
wha t co ns ti tu te s a pr ed ic at e dr ug -tr affi ck in g of fen se un de r 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( c),

Co ng res s de fin ed tra ffi ck in g to in c l u d e si m pl e dr ug po ss es si on , whi ch m ay

en co m pa ss en d us e r s— th e co ns um ers

. See 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( c)(2 ); se e al so Uni te d

St at es v. Kn ox , 95 0 F .2d 51 6, 5 18 (8t h C ir. 1 99 1) . The t erm “ tra ffi ck in g” do es no t

in he ren tl y

ex em pt pu rch as ers

.

W hi le th e de fen da nt s are co rrec t th at § 15 91 do es no t cri m in al iz e en ga gi ng in

a co m m erci al se x act wit h a m in or , it do es no t ne ces sa ril y fo ll ow th at th e st at ut e on ly

ap pl ie s to su pp li ers

. The de fen da nt s f a i l t o ex pl ai n why a pu rch as er who en ti ces ,

-1 0-tra ns po rts

, or ob ta in s a ch il d “ fo r th e pu rp os e of a co m m erci al se x act ” can no t be

gu il ty of bo th se x tra ffi ck in g un de r § 15 91 an d su bs eq ue nt ly en ga gi ng in th e

co m m erci al se x act pr oh ib it ed by an ot he r ap pl ic ab le st at ut e. Tha t th e de fen da nt s can
de sc rib e hypo th et ic al ci rcu m st an ces un de r whi ch a pu rch as er co ul d en ga ge in a

co m m erci al se x act wit ho ut fir st en ti ci ng , tra ns po rti ng , or ob ta in in g a ch il d do es no t

pe rs ua de us th at § 15 91 cat eg or ic al ly ex cl ud es a pu rch as er who se co nd uc t ot he rwis e
vi ol at es th e st at ut e b y

en ti ci ng , tra ns po rti ng or o bt ai ni ng th e m in or

.

The de fen da nt s’ arg um en t t ha t t he di sju nc ti ve st rin g of verb s in § 1 59 1( a)(1 )

li m it s th e or di na ril y br oa d te rm “ ob ta in s” so sh arp ly th at it rev eal s a la te nt ex em pt io n

fo r pu rch as ers an d de m on st rat es § 15 91 co ul d no t po ss ib ly ap pl y to th em is ba se d on

th ei r m is ta ke n be li ef th at a pu rch as er can no t co m m it an y of th e ot he r “pred ic at e

co nd uc t” § 15 91 pr oh ib it s. W e ag ree wit h th e go ve rn m en t th at “ [t]he fact th e di st ric t

co ur t re ad th e se ve n v erb s l is te d i n § 15 91 to de sc rib e pr ed ic at e act s do es no t m ean

th at a c u s t o mer o r pu rch as er can no t en ga ge in at le as t so m e of th e pr oh ib it ed

co nd uc t.”

Co ns id er a pu rch as er who arra ng es wit h a fo ur te en -y ear- ol d pr os ti tu te ’s pi m p

to ta ke th e vi ct im fro m Si ou x Fal ls to Las V e g a s f o r a few da y s fo r $1 ,00 0, du rin g
whi ch ti m e it is ag reed th e ch il d will pr ov id e co m pa ni on sh ip an d pe rfo rm a se x act

. The pu rch as er pi ck s up th e ch il d, dr iv es he r to th e ai rp or t, an d fli es he r to Las Veg as

. The y ta ke a ta xi to a ho te l whe re th e pu rch as er ren ts a ro om an d pr ov id es th e vi ct im

wit h fo od

, cl ot hi ng , an d dru gs fo r se ve ral da y s. Afte r th e v ic ti m pe rfo rm s a s ex act

as ag reed

, th e pu rch as er en ti ces th e ch il d vi ct im to en ga ge in ad di ti on al se x act s wit h

th e pu rch as er fo r th e res t of th e tri p fo r an ad di ti on al $1 00 each ti m e. The pu rch as er

an d th e vi ct im ha ve se x s e v e r a l ti m es be fo re ret ur ni ng to th e ai rp or t an d tra ve li ng
ba ck to Sio ux Fal ls , wher e th e p ur ch as er re tu rn s t he ch il d t o h er p im p.

A reas on ab le jury co ul d co n c l u d e th e pu rch as er kn owi ng ly ha s en ti ced

, ha rb or ed

, tra ns po rte d, ob ta in e d

, an d m ai nt ai ne d th e ch il d kn owi ng sh e wou ld be

-1 1-cau se d to en ga ge in co m m erci al se x act s. The de fen da nt s’ st rai ne d in te rp ret at io n of 4

§ 15 91 wou ld le av e th e pu rch as er’s “ pr ed ic at e co nd uc t” un pu ni sh ed un de r § 15 9 1

be cau se th e pu rch as er po te nt ia ll y c o ul d be pr os ecu te d fo r ot he r cri m es

. Tha t

Co ng res s wou ld in te nd su ch a res ul t is far m or e ab su rd th an pu ni sh in g a pu rch as er
who ot he rwis e v io la te s § 15 91

.

The in fir m it y of de fen da nt s’ fix at io n on th e di st in ct io n be twee n su pp li ers an d

pu rch as ers of co m

m erci al se x act s is la id ba re by on e si m pl e ch an ge to th e fo reg oi ng hypo th et ic al

. Su pp os e rat he r th an pi ck in g up th e vi ct im fro m th e pi m p, th e pu rch as er,

r un ni ng la te

, cal le d an d as ke d th at th e gi rl be dr op pe d of f at hi s ho m e. The v i c t i m

as ks a fri en d, who is aware of al l th e de ta il s of th e arra ng em en t bu t ot he rwis e

un in vo lv ed in tra ffi ck in g, to dri ve th e un de rag e gi rl a few blo ck s to th e pu rch as er’s

ho me. The res t of th e tri p go es as pr ev io us ly de sc rib ed

. Und er th e de fen da nt s’

pr op os ed in te rp ret at io n , t h e c hi ld ’s fri en d wou ld vi ol at e § 15 91 —t he pu rch as er

wou ld no t. Aga in

, we do ub t Co ng res s in te nd ed su ch a res ul t, an d if Co ng res s di d, it

sh ou ld ha ve do ne so ex pr es sl y

.

The de fen da nt s’ rel ia nc e on th e ph ras e “ wil l be cau se d” as ev id en ce th at § 15 91

can no t ap pl y to pu rch as ers is al so m is pl aced

. Co ng res s’s us e of th e fu tu re te ns e sa y s

no th in g ab ou t whe th er a pu rch as er can co m m it th e act s pr oh ib it ed by § 15 91 be fo re

pa rti ci pa ti ng in a co m

m erci al sex act

. In m an y , if n ot all cas es , th e co m m erci al sex

In Bo ne st ro o’s cas e, th e di st ric t co ur t ap pl ie d no sc it ur a so ci is to de te rm in e 4

th at “ ob ta in s” ap pl ie s ex cl us iv el y to tra ffi ck ers be cau se th e ot he r op erat iv e ve rb s in § 15 91 ap pl y on ly t o st ep s in th e pr oc es s of tra ffi ck in g. See Uni te d St at es v. W il li am s

, 55 3 U.S. 28 5, 29 4 (2 00 8 ) ( h o l d i n g th e reac h of a wor d th at is su bjec t to

“ wid e-ra ng in g m ean in gs ” is “ na rro wed b y th e co m m on se ns e can on of no sc it ur a

so ci is —wh ic h co un se ls th at a wor d is gi ve n m or e pr eci se co nt en t by th e ne ig hb or in g

wor ds wit h whi ch it is as so ci at ed ”). W e di sa gr ee wit h th e di st ric t co ur t’s an al y si s be cau se , as we ex pl ai n ab ov e, we co nc lu de a pu rch as er m ay en ti ce, ha rb or , tra ns po rt, ob ta in , and m ai nt ai n t he m in or ch il d, as well as a su pp li er m ay

.

-1 2-act is st il l in th e fu tu re at th e ti m e th e pu rch as e r e nt ic es , tra ns po rts

, ob ta in s or

ot he rwis e tra ffi cs a ch il d in vi ol at io n o f § 15 91

. In th e hypo th et ic al ab ov e, a

reas on ab le jury co ul d fin d th e pu rch as er ob ta in ed

, tra ns po rte d, ha rb or ed

, m ai nt ai ne d,

an d en ti ced th e ch il d be fo re th e ch il d was “ cau se d to en ga ge ” in va rio us co m m erci al

se x act s. Perh ap s m or e co m m on ly, a pu rch as er co ul d a g r e e o n th e st reet co rn er to

pu rch as e a se x act wit h a ch il d, bu t ta ke th e ch il d to a m ot el or dr iv e to a rem ot e sp ot

to en ga ge in th e act

. Aga in

, th e se x act is pr os pe ct iv e whe n th e p ur ch as er ob ta in s 5

a n d t r a n s po rts th e ch il d. Giv en th at th e co m m erci al se x act can be in th e fu t u r e

reg ard le ss of whe th er a su pp li er or pu rch as er co m m it s th e co nd uc t pr oh i bi te d by
§ 15 91

, we fai l to se e ho w th e ph ras e “wi l l b e cau se d” so m eh ow m an ife st s a

co ng res si on al in te nt to li m it § 1 59 1 t o s up pl ie rs

. 6

W e al so reject th e de fen da nt s’ arg um en ts th at Co ng r e s s c o u ld no t ha ve

in te nd ed th at § 15 91 ap pl y to pu rch as ers be cau se (1 ) ap pl y in g § 15 91 to pu rch as ers

so m eh ow ren de rs ot he r pa rts of th e TVPA m ean in gl es s, an d (2 ) ot he r st at ut es al read y

pr oh ib it en ga gi ng in se x wit h m in or s. See, e.g ., 18 U.S.C. § 22 41 (c ) ( a g gr av at ed

se xu al as sa ul t); 18 U.S.C. § 24 22 (b ) (co er ci on an d en ti cem en t); an d 18 U.S.C.

As th e go ve rn men t p o i n ts ou t, Ju ng ers ex pr es se d a de si re to ta ke wha t he 5

ex pe ct ed to be an el ev en -y ear- ol d gi rl so m ewh ere el se so sh e co ul d pe rfo rm or al se x

on hi m

.

To be su re, Co ng res s’s u se of t he pa ss iv e vo ic e “ can m ak e th e m ean in g of a 6

st at ut e so m ewh at di ffi cu lt to as cert ai n.” Uni te d St at es v. W il so n, 50 3 U.S. 32 9, 33 4-
35 (19 92 ). “ The pa ss iv e vo ic e fo cu se s on an ev en t th at oc cu rs wit ho ut res pe ct to a
sp eci fic act o r , an d th eref or e wit ho ut res pe ct to an y act or ’s in te nt or cu lp ab il it y .”

Dean v. Uni te d St at es , 55 6 U.S. 56 8, 57 2 (2 00 9) (ex pl ai ni ng “ us e of pa ss iv e vo ic e in

st at ut or y ph ras e ‘to be us ed ’ in 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( d) (1 ) refl ect s ‘agn os ti ci sm

. . . ab ou t who do es th e us in g’” (q uo ti ng W at so n v. Uni te d St at es , 55 2 U.S. 74

, 80 (2 00 7) )). “ It
is whe th e r s o met h in g ha pp en ed —n ot ho w or why it ha pp en ed —t ha t m at te rs .” Id

. Th e pa ss iv e ph ras e “ wil l be cau se d,” whi ch refl ect s “ ag no st ic is m

. . . ab ou t who ”

cau se s th e ch il d to en ga ge in th e co m m erci al se x ac t

, do es no t pr ecl ud e ap pl y in g § 1 59 1 t o a pu rch as er. W at so n, 5 52 U.S. at 8 0.

-1 3-§ 24 23 (b ) (tr an sp or ta ti on of m in or s)

. To be gi n, we d o n o t c on cl ud e § 15 91

cri m i na li zes th e act of en ga gi ng in a co m m erci al se x act wit h a m in or

. Rat he r, we

co nc lu de a pu rch as er m ay be co nv ic te d fo r co m

m it ti ng an act pro hi bi te d b y § 1 59 1

wit ho ut ev er en ga gi ng in a se x a ct

. 7

As fo r an y ov erl ap wi t h i n th e TVPA or wit h ot he r cri m in al st at ut es ,

“ [r]edu nd an ci es acro ss st at ut es are no t un us ua l ev en ts in dr aft in g, an d so lo ng as th ere
is no ‘pos it iv e rep ug na nc y ’ be twee n two la ws, a co ur t m us t gi ve effe ct to bo th .”

Co nn

. Nat’l Ban k v. Germ ai n, 50 3 U.S. 24 9, 25 3 (1 99 2) (q uo ti n g Wo o d v

. Uni te d

S t a t e s , 41 U.S. (1 6 Pet .) 34 2, 36 3 (1 84 2) ). The re is no rep ug na nc y he re. The

de fen da nt s dr aw a cred ib le di st in ct io n be twee n ob ta in in g a p e r s o n, se e 18 U.S.C.
§ § 1 5 9 0 , 1 59 1, an d ob ta in in g th ei r la bo r or se rv ic es , s ee 18 U.S.C. § 15 89 , b ut fai l

to es ta bl is h ou r in te rp ret at io n of § 15 91 ren de rs a n y p art of th e TVPA who ll y
red un da nt or m ean in gl es s.

The d e f e n d a nt s’ a ss ert io n th at th ei r po te nt ia l cu lp ab il it y un de r ot he r st at ut es

in di cat es Co ng res s in te nd ed cat eg or ic al ly to e x c l u d e p ur ch as ers fro m § 15 91 al so

fal ls sh or t. In en act in g § 15 91 , Con gr es s fo un d

Exi st in g le gi sl at io n an d la w en fo rcem en t in th e Uni te d St at es an d ot he r

co un tri es are in ad eq ua te t o de te r tra ffi ck in g an d br in g tra ffi ck ers to jus ti ce, fai li ng to refl ect th e g r a v i t y o f th e of fen se s in vo lv ed

. No

co m pr eh en si ve la w e xi st s in th e Uni te d S ta te s t ha t p en al iz es th e ran ge of of fen se s in vo l v e d in th e tra ffi ck in g sc he m e. In st ead

, ev en th e m os t br ut al in st an c e s o f t r affi ck in g in th e se x in du st ry are of te n pu ni sh ed

un de r la ws th at al so ap pl y to le ss er of fen se s, so th at tra ffi ck ers typic al ly

es cap e d es erv ed pu ni sh m en t.

In de ed

, th e Nin th Ci rcu it ha s he ld th at a jury can fin d a vi ol at io n of § 15 91 (a) 7

ev en if th e m in or ne ve r en ga ge s in a co m m erci al se x act

. See Uni te d S t a t e s v. Bro ok s, 61 0 F.3 d 11 86

, 11 97 n.4 (9 th Ci r. 20 10 ); Uni te d St at es v. Tod d, 62 7 F.3 d
32 9, 3 33 -3 4 (9 th Cir . 20 10 ).

-1 4-22 U.S.C. § 71 01 (b )(1 4)

. App lying § 15 91 to pu rch as ers of co m m erci al se x act s who

vi ol at e th e st at ut e de sp it e th ei r ex po su re to pu ni sh m en t fo r rel at ed cri m es is en ti rel y

co ns is te nt wit h Con gr es s’s co nc ert ed effo rts “ to co m ba t traff ic ki ng in pe rs on s” an d

“ en su re jus t an d e ffec ti ve pu ni sh m en t o f tr affi ck ers .” Id . at 7 10 1( a).

Lim it in g th e ap pl ic at io n of § 15 91 to su pp li ers m ay m ak e so m e se ns e

an al y ti cal ly, bu t “ Co ng res s di d no t writ e th e s t a t u te th at way .” Uni te d St at es v.
Naft al in , 4 41 U.S. 7 68 , 77 3 (1 97 9) . “ It m ay well be th at Co ng res s, whe n it dr aft ed

th e la ng ua ge of [§ 15 91 ], ha d in m in d [s up pl ie rs op erat in g la rg e tra ffi ck in g rin gs ], bu t

th e la ng ua ge [o f § 15 91 ] is no t so li m it ed .” Sm it h, 50 8 U.S. at 23 9 (q uo ti ng Uni te d

St at es v. Harri s, 95 9 F.2 d 24 6, 26 2 (D.C. Ci r. 19 92 ), ab ro ga te d in pa rt by, Uni te d

St at es v. St ewart

, 24 6 F.3 d 72 8, 73 1 (D.C. C i r

. 2 0 0 1 ) ) (in te rn al m ark s om it te d)
(in te rp ret in g 1 8 U.S.C. § 92 4( c)). Sect io n 15 91 m ak es no ex cep ti on for pu rch as ers

or cu st om ers , an d th os e te rm s, as well as su pp ly an d su pp li er, “ ap pe ar no whe re in th e

st at ut e.” Sm it h, 5 08 U.S. at 2 29

.

“ [W] e or di na ril y res is t read in g wor ds or el em en ts in to a st at ut e th at do no t

ap pe ar on it s face .” Dean

, 55 6 U.S. at 57 2 (q uo ti ng Bat es v. Uni te d St at es , 52 2 U.S.

23

, 29 (1 99 7) ) (in te rn a l q u o t at io n m ark s om it te d)

. The Su pr em e Co ur t ha s “ st at ed

ti m e an d ag ai n th at co ur ts must pr es um e th at a le gi sl at ur e sa y s in a st at ut e wha t it

m ean s an d m ean s i n a st at ut e wha t i t s ay s t he re.” Germ ai n, 5 03 U.S. at 2 53 -5 4.

Had Co ng res s in te nd ed to ex cl ud e pu rch as ers fro m § 15 91 (a)( 1 ) ’s bl an ke t

pr oh ib it io n o f se x- tra ffi ck in g a ct s o r li m it it s ap pl ic at io n t o s up pl ie rs , it co ul d h av e
do ne so e x p r es sl y

. See, e.g ., 18 U.S.C. § 15 87 (li m it in g ap pl ic at io n of a st at ut e

p r o h i b i ti ng th e po ss es si on of sl av es ab oa rd a ve ss el to “ th e cap ta in

, m as te r , o r

co m m an de r of an y ve ss el ”); 18 U.S.C. § 15 88 (li m it in g ap pl ic at io n of a st at ut e

pr oh ib it in g th e tra ns po rt of sl av es to t he “ m as te r or own er or pe rs on ha vi ng ch arg e

of an y ve ss el ”); 18 U.S.C. § 15 92 (b ) (ex cep ti ng vi ct im s of se ve re fo rm s of tra ffi ck in g

-1 5-fro m a st at ut e pr oh ib it in g cert ai n co nd uc t wit h res pe ct to pa ss po rts an d im m ig rat io n

do cu m en ts “ in fu rth eran ce of tra ffi ck in g, pe on ag e, sl av ery, in vo lu nt ary se rv it ud e, or

fo rced la bo r”). “ W e do no t li gh tl y as su m e th at Co ng res s ha s om it te d fro m it s ad op te d

te xt req ui rem en ts t h a t it no ne th el es s in te nd s to ap pl y , an d ou r rel uc ta nc e is ev en

gr eat er whe n Co ng res s ha s sh own el se whe re in th e sa m e st at ut e th at it kn ows ho w to

m ak e su ch a req ui rem en t m an ife st .” Ja m a v . ICE, 54 3 U.S. 3 35 , 34 1 (2 00 5)

.

In sh or t, “ Co ng res s kn o w s ho w to craf t an ex cep ti on [o r im

po se a st at us

req ui rem en t] when it in te nd s on e.” See Jo na h R. v. Carm on a, 44 6 F .3d 10 00 , 10 07
(9 th Cir . 20 06 ). It h as no t d on e so in § 1 59 1.

The un am bi gu ou s tex t of § 15 91 m ak es no di st in ct io n b et ween su pp li ers an d

p u r c h a se rs of co m

m erci al se x act s wit h ch il dr en , an d th e de fen da nt s ha ve fai le d to

pe rs ua de us Co ng res s in te nd ed a su pp li er-o nl y li m it at io n or a pu rch as er ex cep ti on in
§ 15 91 th at Co ng res s ne ve r st at ed

. W e ho ld § 15 91 ap pl i e s t o a pu rch as er of

co m m erci al sex act s wh o v io la te s t he st at ut e’s te rm s. 8

The qu es ti on rem ai ns whe th er th e de fen da nt s’ co nd uc t vi o l a t es §§ 15 91 an d

15 94 (a). Hav in g th or ou gh ly rev ie wed th e reco rd in each cas e, we co nc lu de Ju ng ers ’s

a n d Bo ns es tro o’s res pe ct iv e juri es reas on ab ly fo un d each of th em gu il ty be y on d a

reas on ab le do ub t of at te m pt in g to en ga ge in ch il d se x tr a ffi ck in g, in vi ol at io n of
§§ 15 91 an d 1 59 4( a).

The un co nt es te d ev id en ce ad du ced at Ju ng ers ’s tri al

, vi ewed “ in th e li gh t m os t

fav or ab le to th e go ve rn m en t” al on g with al l “ reas on ab le in fere nc es th at su pp or t th e

ve rd ic t,” W ard

, 68 6 F.3 d at 88 2 (q uo ti ng Jo hn so n, 63 9 F

. 3 d a t 4 3 7 -3 8) (in te rn al

“ Bec au se th e st at ut or y la ng ua ge is cl ear,” we ne ed no t reach th e de fen da nt s’ 8

arg um en ts ba se d on “ le gi sl at iv e hi st or y , or th e ru le of le ni ty.” Bo y le v. Uni te d St at es , 55 6 U.S. 9 38 , 95 0 (2 00 9)

.

-1 6-qu ot at io n m ark s om it te d)

, sh owe d Ju ng ers at te m pt ed to obt ai n an el ev en -y ear- ol d gi rl

fo r an ho ur so sh e co ul d pe rfo rm or al se x on hi m

. W he n he arri ve d at th e de si gn at ed

ho us e, Ju ng ers to ld th e un de rco ve r of fic er he wan te d to ta ke th e gi rl so m ewh ere el se

fo r se x be cau se he was un co m fo rta bl e wit h ha vi ng se x a t t h e ho us e. Ju ng ers ’s

at te m pt to ga in ex c lu si ve po ss es si on , cu st od y , an d co nt ro l of th e un de rag e gi rl

kn owi ng sh e wou ld be cau se d to en ga ge i n a c o m m erci al se x act am

pl y su pp or ts

Ju ng ers ’s con vi ct io n fo r at te m pt ed sex tra ffi ck in g.

Bo ne st ro o pr es en ts a cl os er cas e. Bo ne st ro o co nc ed es th e te rm “ ob ta in ” is

“ in cred ib ly br oa d” an d can m ean acq ui rin g, co nt ro ll in g, or po ss es si ng so m et hin g “ fo r

a sh or t pe rio d of ti m e,” bu t as s e r t s t h e r e is no ev id en ce he at te m pt ed to ob ta in or

po ss es s a m in or be cau se he was o nl y att em pt in g t o p ay

for sex . W e d is ag ree.

Bo ne st ro o arra ng ed wit h un de rco ve r of fic ers to acq ui re cu st od y an d co nt ro l of

wha t he be li ev ed to be fo ur te en -y ear- ol d twi n gi rls wit ho ut an y on e el se pr es en t fo r

an ho ur

. In ne go ti at in g th e tra ns act io n, Bo ne st ro o as ke d “ How m uc h fo r th e twi ns .”

Bo ne st ro o th en ag reed to pa y $2 00 to ge t th e gi rls al on e wit h hi m in a ro om s o he

co ul d d o a n yt h i n g he wan te d to th em sh or t of vi si bl e ph y si cal ab us e. The jury

reas on ab ly fo un d Bo ne st ro o at te m pt ed to ob ta in th e gi rls as th at te r m i s u s e d in
§§ 15 91 an d 1 59 4( a).

II I. CONCLUSI ON

W e rev ers e th e jud gm en t of acq ui tt al en te red by th e di st ric t co ur t fo r each

de fen da nt

, an d w e r e man d t he cas es wit h in st ru ct io ns fo r th e di st ric t co ur t in each

cas e to rei ns ta te th e jury verd ic t an d p ro ceed wit h s en te nc in g.

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

-1 7-