2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 6-27-2005 

# U SA v . Jime ne z -C alde ron P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 03-3738

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . Jime nez -C alde r on" (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 964. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/964T h e H o n o rab le Jan E . D u B o is, S en ior U n it ed S tat es D istri ct Ju d g e f o r th e E astern 1 D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a, s i t t i ng bydes i gnat i on. NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL

I N TH E UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS

F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT C as e N o: 03- 3738 UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v. 

### AN TO NI A J I MENE Z- CA LD ER ON , a/k/ aMI RI AM CO RT EZ , a/k/ aMI RI AM GA RC I A, a/k/a BON IFAC IO Ant oni aJ i m e ne z - Ca l de r on,

A ppel l ant

O n ap p ea l fo rm the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt fort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey D istri ct Ju d g e: T h e H o n o rab le F aith S . H o ch b erg

D istri ct C o u rtN o . 0 2 -00 5 5 3 -3

A r gued J une 16, 2004 B efor e: A L I T O and SM I T H , C i r cui tJ udges , and

D U B O I S, D i s t r i ctJ udge 1 ( Fi l ed: J une 27, 2005)2 OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

C hes t erM . K el l er , E s q. ( A r gued) Fi r s tA s s i s t antFeder al Publ i c D efe nder 972 B r oad St r eet N ew ark, N ew J er s ey07102 C ouns el forA ppel l ant S a b rin a G . C o m izz o li A s s i s t antU . S. A t t or ney G eor ge S. L eone C hi ef, A ppeal s D i vi s i on U . S. A t t or ney ’ s O ffi ce 970 B r oad St r eet N ew ark, N ew J er s ey07102 C ouns el forA ppel l ee D U B O I S, D i s t r i ctJ udge: A ppel l ant , A nt oni a J i m enez - C al der on, pl ed gui l t yt o C ount s O ne and Fourt een of t he Super cedi ng I ndi ctm enti n t hi s cas e on J anuary17, 2003. C ountO ne cha r ged appel l antand fourof herco- cons pi r at or s w i t h cons pi r acy( a) t o pr ovi de and obt ai n l abor a n d se rv ice s o f

u n d e ra g e M e x ica n g irls b yth re a ts o f se rio u s h a rm a n d p h y sic a l re stra in t, c o n tra ryto 1 8 U .S .C . § 1 5 8 9 , an d (b ) to re c ru it, h a rb o r, tran sp o rt, p ro v id e a n d o b tain un derage M exican gir l s, kn ow i ng t hat force, fraud an d co erci on w ou l d b e used to cause t he gi r l s t o engage i n comm er ci al s ex ac t s , aff ect i ng i nt er s t at e comm er ce, contr aryt o 18 U . S. C . § 1591( a) , i n vi ol at i on of 18 U . S. C . § 371. C ountFour t een c har ged appe l l antand3

t hr ee of herco- cons pi r at or s w i t h comm er ci al s ex tr aff i cki ng byfor ce, fr aud and c oer ci on affecti ng i nter st at e com m erce i n v i olat i on of 1 8 U . S . C . §§ 15 97 (a) (1) and (2) . O n A ug ust 7 , 2 0 0 3 , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt s e n te n c e d a p p e lla n t, in tera lia , t o i m pr i s onm entfora t erm of 21 0 m on t hs. A ppel l antchal l enges onl yhers ent ence i n t hi s appea l . Speci fi cal l y , s he r ai s es t he foll ow i ng argum ents : 1 . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt e rr e d in e n h a n c in g th e o f f e n s e le v e l u n d e r U .S .S .G . § 2G 1. 1( b) ( 4) ( B ) for“otherw i s e undul yi nfl uenci ng a mi nort o engage i n a comm er ci al s ex act ” on the gr ound t hats uch conduc tw as i ncorpor at ed i nt o t he bas e off ens e l evel c a lc u la tio n u n d e r U .S .S .G . § 2 G 1 . 1 (b)(1 ); 2. T he di s t r i ctcour terr ed i n appl y i ng a 2- l evel vul ner abl e vi ct i m enhanc ement pur s uantt o U . S. S. G . § 3A 1. 1; and, 3. T he di s t r i ctcour terr ed i n det erm i ni ng thatdefe ndantw as an or gani zerorl eade r of a c r i m i nal act i vi t yt hati nvol ved fi ve orm or e part i ci pant s orw as ot herw i s e ext ens i ve pur s uantt o U . S. S. G . § 3B 1. 1. A ppel l ant ’ s s ent ence w as i m pos ed pr i ort o t he Supr eme C our tdeci s i on i n U ni t ed St at es v. B ooker , 125 S. C t . 738 ( 2005) . I n B ooker , t he Supr eme C our tdecl ar ed thatt he U n ite d S ta te s S e n te n c in g G u id e lin e s a re o n ly ad v is o ry. Id . a t 7 5 7 . A s a re su lt, appel l ant ’ s s ent ence m ayhave be en af fec t ed byt he di s t r i ctcour t ’ s t r eatm entof theG u i d e l i n e s a s m a n d a t o r y.

Pur s uantt o t he C our t ’ s N ot i ce da t ed February17, 2005, appel l ants ubm i t t ed a l et t erpur s uantt o Feder al R ul e of A ppel l at e Pr ocedur e 28( j ) on M ar ch 4, 2005, i n w hi ch sh e stated sh e w an ts t o ch all en g e h er se n tenc e u n d er B ooker , and the governm ent r es ponded. T hi s C our tconcl udes t hatt he s ent enci ng i s s ues appel l antr ai s es and herchal l enge to h er se n tenc e u n d er B ookera re b e s t d e te rm in e d b yth e d is tr ic t c o u rt in th e f ir s t in s ta n c e . T h e re f o re , w e w ill v a c a te th e se n ten c e a n d re m a n d f o r re -se n ten c in g in a c c o rd a n c e w ith B ooker .